I don't have anything particular in mind for this topic other than just sharing and talking. We all know some of the common ones such as 2D6 Combat, Stackable/Graduated Armour, etc. I'm just idly curious if anyone is playing regularly or optionally with any usual rules that haven't been often mention. Anything that might be of interest for variety, etc.

Ahoy!

We play "Staggered Experience".

We play that to raise either Strength or Craft costs trophies equal to the next highest level of statistic plus 1.

E.g. You have Strength 2, it costs 4 Strength trophies to raise to 3.

E.g. You have Craft 7, it costs 9 Craft trophies to raise to 8.

We did this to give an incentive for players to seek more powerful game... (we felt a Craft 9 Wizard shouldn't even be wasting his time with a Craft 4 Spirit).

I see... and approve! (Though I think my group might give me the collective evil eye.) I have seen some variations on this where a base cost was established and the price to get the next +1 to Strength or Craft disregarded the character's "natural" abilities. It went something like this (if I remember it right)...

Base cost = 3..5..7... depending on how fast a game you want, just like in the rules.
S/C Token cost = however many you have plus 1

Example:

• The Warrior already has 3 Craft tokens (not 3 Craft total, just token bonuses on top of Starting Craft).
• He wants to go for the 4th bonus to Craft.
• The base cost for bumping earned Strength and Craft for the night's game is 5.
• 5 + (4 + 1) = 10 points of Craft trophies to get that 4th bonus

It seems a little steep, at least for my tastes, but the base cost is flexible, just like the the standard rules. Yet it has some of your approaches escalation without the cost being based in the Character's natural talent. And I can see both some ups and downs on that point.

I might be inclined to lose the base cost, then maybe just elevate the bonus cost more like you've done. Maybe even just double the cost? 2nd bonus = 4 points of trophy? 5th bonus = 10 points of trophies? It would allow characters a chance to get a few powerups more easily in the beginning and hitting the higher build up later on more difficult.

Anyway, yours overall still sees the most sound to me.

In my gaming group we have tried to figure out some alternative combat rules. But with the 2D6 Combat and other systems, we always fall in trouble when justify the warrior and amazone who have bigger advantage from these rules than other characters.

Did you come up with a way to deal with it, such as them rolling 3 dice and discarding 1? Were they still too potent?

It's not my personla rule, but on a Polish forum one player (Rinaldo) suggested a very interesting rule concerning encounters with Characters. Namely, when you encounter a space with a Character on it, he/she is treated as a Stranger so the steps of encountering a space go more or less like this:

1. Encounter any Event cards
2. Encounter any Enemies cards
3. Encounter any Stranger Cards
4. Encounter another Character(s) - options: fight, trade, do nothing
5. Take any objects from the space
6. Encounter any Place cards
7. Encounter space instruction

It seems to work quite well and we haven't found any glitches so far.

Erestor said:

We play the same, save the turn order is slightly different;

1. Encounter Space Instruction (Lose 1 Life at Chapel, Graveyard, Crags etc)
2. Encounter Characters (have a fight, use encounter powers)
3. Encounter Cards in Order Number (lowest to highest)
4. Encounter Objects (dropping objects, take new objects etc)

Best Regards

DTH

Oh yeah... including characters in encounters has been around a very long time. Our approach is to set all other adventurers as Order 7. Some people prefer them at other times in the order scheme. Some complain that the turns take to long, the CvC doesn't always come up that often (PvP is another matter). Others like that occassionally there's more to do, accomplish... or acquire in a few turns during the game.

Dth, I notice you have the encounter instructions as first, but encounter cards as third. So if the instructions are for card draws, do you draw them, then encounter the other character, then encounter the cards?

Has anyone else every used the "Barter" rule for an additional option when adventurers encounter each other? I noticed Erastor mentioned it.

JCHendee said:

Yes, they still have this advantage, that rolloing a double 1 is very hard and easier getting double 6, when playing with the rule, where you always lose on double 1 and win on double 6. It is most the double 1 that bothers me. It is nearly impassible for them gettiing that result.

Hmmm... yes, I see what you mean about doubles with 3 dice to choose from. Can't think of fix for it myself. Overall, there aren't too many characters who get the double-roll-and-pick option. And most people who play the 2D6 are ones who are tired of too many autowins with 1D6.

When we play True Fate rules, people can use a Fate to roll an extra die, though that's costly, obviously. Those with double rolls special ability can do the same and pick, just like in 2D6. But I never thought about how it would affect the chance of double 1s and 6s for such characters in 2D6.

The standard chance of rolling snake eyes is about 2.78%; with three dice and choose, there would have to be three 1s rolled to force a double 1. That's about 0.47% chance, so really low. On the other end, the standard 2.78% chance of double 6s escalates to about 8.34% for any two of three dice rolled. Still, it is less than the 16.7% chance of 6 in the 1 die combat. The problem of course is playing the autowin rule along with it.

You might want to try just playing 2D6 without the autowin/lose. It will still give you fewer non-rolled wins in combat than with 1D6; someone would have to have a margin of 12 points above an opponent to not have to roll.

By the way, in 1D6 combat, those who can roll-and-choose have a 16.7% chance of always rolling higher than an opponent of the same strength or craft. It's a bit much for my taste. In 2D6 combat, allowing them to pick and choose between 3 dice, their chance of rolling higher is again about 8.34%, so not as drastic. They still have an edge though, but a more tempered one.

I think I take the last part you explained, to my next game and remove the auto win and auto lose. I think it will work better and there will go long time anyway before a character can auto win to creatures.

2d6: You would need strenght 14 to auto win to a strenght 3.

VS.

1d6: You will here only need a strenght 9 to auto win to strenght 3.

Now there is only the assasin left who can have too big advantage of the rule. He would kill dragons and worse from the start of the game.

cheer

Most groups I associate with (still a minority) have nerfed his using assassinate on anything, anytime. It was a bad choice in 4ER. They play him like in older editions of Talisman. He can only assassinate when he lands on a face up Enemy, or when he attacks another adventurer (but not when he is attacked).

There have been some games where someone insists on playing him as is... and everyone makes sure that assassin is turned into a spell magnet. He rarely lasts, and he never has won.

He hee, that is what he deserves

I will play him that way as well. It will also be more fun playing him, not feeling having a owerpowered character.

Thinking on it a bit more, I am sort of liking the scheme of encounter that Erestor described. If CvC is allowed in addition to facing encounters generated by the space, the positioning of CvC seems well placed. If character #1 (already on the space) drops stuff, when #2 arrives, it can't just pick up that Runesword and whack #1 right off. Much as that might be actually possible, it keeps that kind of situation toned down. Characters doing scavenging have to face anyone present as they are (if they wish) and then grab anything left behind.

Of course having CvC be last after everything else also avoids this problem. But the fact that all "active" encounters (Enemies, Strangers, characters, etc.) are completed before "passive" encounters (Objects, Places, etc.) has its own sense. You have to deal with the active/mobile dangers before you can do some effective exploring for passive/stationary opportunities.

The following is something I put together based on Erestor's notes (but with some additional tweaks). It is not a recommendation for others to adopt. I'm merely sharing it here, as I'm going to throw it at my crew whenever we get to playing again in the next few week. It's not far off how we already play, but having it printed out will help get the minor differences down quickly. It's full print resolution, so if you want a closer look, just right-click and select View or Save (As).

If it's accepted by the gang (with more changes or not), the only problem will be figuring out what kind of icon is every going to work on the card's back for such a concept. Later all.

After two test games (3 and 4 players) played without expansion boards, a few tweaks to the rules card were discussed and implemented. I've just copied the text in rather than post another oversized graphic. With time and familiarity, the rules card would probably not be needed, but that's the same with any house rules (unless you're like us, and occassionally play by different rules).

In the past, we have played games by both standard rules and allowing CvC encounters after all space generated encounters were completed. By comparison to both forms of play, we found no noticable increase in game time, though two games is not enough to be certain.

Shifting CvC up in the order (before getting ones hands on goodies) brought a mixed response at first. After some play, all seemed to favor it. This variation on Erestor's original mentioned rules was well received. It even won out over our previous method for CvC inclusion after facing space-based encounters.

CvC actually increased vs play by standard rules; adventurers no longer had to choose between space-generated encounters and encountering each other. It was seen as a greater opportunity for gains.

"Trade" as a new CvC option didn't occur often; only twice in the second game; only once was a trade achieved. More later.

Full Encounters

Adventurers may engage both encounters within a space and another adventurer present. Because both types of encounters are now possible in the same turn, the following special conditions are necessary for when, if, and how an adventurer chooses to encounter another present.

1. GENERAL RULES

1. A board space is not an encounter. Its instructions may generate encounters through cards, a die roll, or other game mechanics. A board space is the environment in which encounters occur.

2. A space may have influences or effects upon both encounters and/or adventurers, such as found on the Desert, Runes, Cursed Glade, etc. All adventurers on a space are subject to all influences and effects listed.

3. An adventurer may not ignore any space effects or instructions because it intends to encounter another adventurer present.

2. ENCOUNTER ORDER

A. Follow all space instructions not related to drawing cards.

B. Now follow all space instructions related to cards. Standard card order still applies with the following additions.

1. Events.
2. Enemies, Strength-based.
3. Enemies, Craft-based.
4. Strangers

4.1 You may choose one adventurer on the space to encounter by one of the following methods: Special Ability, Battle, or Psychic Combat (if allowed). Spells and other accessory options apply normally.

5. Objects & Magic Objects.
6. Places.

3. OPTION: TRADE

Trade is an addition to encounter options listed under 2.4.1 above. The adventurer may offer to buy, sell, or trade one Magic Object or Object, or any Follower that also exists in Purchase card format (Mule, Horse & Cart, etc.) The other adventurer so encountered may accept, reject, or make a counter offer. If no trade is then achieved, then the encounter ends.

Here is a entertaining house rule we sometimes play with.

Loot
* Sort out all objects (including bags of gold) and magic objects from the Adventure deck. Put back 1/3 of the cards and put the rest in a separate
pile - the Loot deck.
* Each time you defeat a Spirit, Monster, Dragon or Cultist roll 1 die and add the Strength or Craft to the
score. If the score is 8-12 draw one loot card. If more than 12 draw two loot cards and choose one to keep.
* Each time a result from a card (expect bag of gold) tell you to gain 2 gold - draw 1 loot card instead. If a result tell you
to gain 3 or more gold - draw 2 loot cards and choose one to keep.

Hinnyboy said:

I've been thinking about doing something similar.

One of the issues I have these days is the glut of events, strangers and objects. I swear that these outweight the Creatures, meaning gaining Strength and Craft can be an absolute drag.

My solution to this would be to separate out the creatures and have a separate deck. Each time you land on a space where you should draw a card, draw from the standard non-creature Adventure Deck. If you draw an Object or a Place, you then draw a creature as its guardian. You must defeat said creature before you can visit the place or take the object.

On the issue of gold for "loot"... do you have the option to keep the gold instead?

->dth: That is an interesting variant I must try.

I wonder pros and cons of these variants.

JC wrote:

"On the issue of gold for "loot"... do you have the option to keep the gold instead?"

Not the way we play. You still can get gold from bags of gold as loot howerver.

This is a very minor rule change, but I thought I'd mention it:

Whenever you roll 2 dice for movement (e.g. with the Riding Horse), any 1 triggers Death and any 6 triggers Magic Capret, Leprechaun/Troll ability, etc.

If you have a card that lets you choose your movement amount (e.g. Clockwork Owl), choosing 1 triggers Death and choosing 6 triggers powers.

This rule makes certain things trigger more often, and Death is fun.

I can see the part about death, as you race around attracting attention, but not the other stuff. I don't see any rational or game balance in abilities being triggered more often because someone rides a horse. But if it's fun for your crew, then go for it!

ASIDE: a movement trigger for special abilities (especially for the longest move you can make on foot) is a bit silly and a head-scratcher by itself. I'd have at least set the Troll's trigger for rolling a 1 instead, when the big hulk (pun?) is not exerting himself. But of course most of the game is built on the idea of "high roll good, low roll bad."

The only House rule i used for my cards are:

Trapdoor,

Burrow Wurm,

Giant Spider

Snow Drifts

( + using the old rule for minstrel with ditching animals)

Nothing that hasn't been said before but here are my two cents :

1. Modified fight with re-rolls (or exploding dice like I heard it is called) - on a roll of 6, you roll again and add rolls together (enemies too ).

It takes care of auto-kills and is pretty user-friendly.

2. Gaining Strength - one point for trophies worth double your current strength. It slows down crazy "buffing up" in the end-game.

3. Free trade if you meet another character. Usefull sometimes if you manage to bribe or dupe other player to give you what you need .

4. Finally the most munchkin'y house rule of all: You can carry up to four items EXCEPT anything you are wearing or wielding .

I know. This last one just breaks whole gameplay. I just can't help it. I play to kill the monsters and gather the treasure. How much can you gather if you can carry just four things at one time. I'm sorry. I'll go play "Munchkin - the Board Game" now... .

But there is actually a method in this madness. OK, so you are Warrior with Armor, Shield, Helm and Sword. And that's it? Didn't they invented travel bags or backpacks in the Talisman World yet? Of course you can only wear one item of any kind at any given time. Want to haul three breastplates around? No problem, but you can wear only one. Wielding two swords at once? Good luck with that...

After a few beers your playmates might become more lenient. Once after looking long and hard on an artwork of two cards my friends decided: "Yeah, sure. This Powerglove (S+2) is right and this Golden Gauntlet (S+2) is left. You can wear both."

Felis said:

...on a roll of 6, you roll again and add rolls together (enemies too ). It takes care of auto-kills and is pretty user-friendly.

Agreed, user-friendly and it does work. But that 6 comes up 16.7% of the time, and that's more often than most people think; on average, once in 6 turns produces an extra roll. 2D6 is one roll and you're done, and the probabilities on the range are more balance than on a triggered second die.

Felis said:

Okay, I think I understand this one better than as mentioned in another topic. So if you have a Starting of 3 and 2 Tokens for total of 5, you need 10 points of trophy to jump to 6. That's good for when playing the standard commercial cards, which have slightly more freebies than in the old days. Of course it also means to hit a 10 Strength to face the inner region you'll need to amass trophies to 20. For some groups focused on the win more than the adventure, that just means they'll target the freebies more often. I think a an incremental approach is more balanced, using a standard addition to the cost rather than multiplying the cost of a token.

Felis said:

Free trade if you meet another character. Usefull sometimes if you manage to bribe or dupe other player to give you what you need .

Yup, we've started using Trade as an additional CvC encounter option. Of course it only really matters if characters can actually encounter each other by choice. That doesn't happen often unless the group is large for a game. With more expansion boards, it happens even less. With moment modifying cards in 4ER (horse, H&C, etc.) being pure randoms instead of the old random plus minimal chosen modifier it is less again. Trade just isn't used unless characters encounter each other by choice... or when one landing on another is substantially weaker. Even then, the stronger one isn't going to see much worth trading for. That's been evident in actual play.

Felis said:

If it's fun then do it, of course you've already got another game that's already built for it, as you mentioned; might as well just go play Munchkins. The idea of "wearing" armor, shield, weapon, and then a magic item might still allow having something else as well... but not four more items. It makes mules and other baggage items and followers worthless, aside from item combination as unrealistic.

Better to declare which items are "adornments" and have them not count against Object Limit when worn. For example, if that Magic Object were the Crown or the Ring, it wouldn't count agains limit while worn. The armor, shield and weapon would, whether used or not. And of course limit the wearing to only one of the same type (one ring, one head adornment, etc.) to keep things from getting too ludicrous. ("I'm wearing my helmet over my circlet with the crown on top of both, so there").

Felis said:

You're discounting all of the supplies you would need to survive. And no, you wouldn't be able to just live off the land, even a fantasy one. I'll leave that far a push out of Talisman to other games that like to go for the ridiculous on purpose... like Munchkins.