No idea if anyone has mentioned this idea before, I havent noticed it by any rate, but I had a thought on a reworking of the Assasinate ability which would make it slightly less over-powered.

Assassinate: When you engage in battle your opponent rolls 2 dice and you may choose which result is used. If used against an enemy that is allowed to roll multiple dice, you each roll 1 die.

tjedgar said:

Ethier that or say he may only Assassinate characters.

It seems a little cumbersome, and it doesn't really reflect an assassination attempt. In general, we stick with the way it was written but use a vary old interpretation of attack vs attacked that goes all the way back to a WIDE spread players ruling from Talisman 2E.

In the case of Enemies just drawn, or any non-character opponent generated by a non-Enemy card or a space, it is always on the attack. The Assassin is therefore being attacked and may not use his assassinate ability. He may only assassinate another character when he is the attacker; he may only assassinate an Enemy when he lands on one already placed on the board.

JCHendee said:

Really?

Well that does change his ability.

And this ruling also specifically means the Assassin cannot use that ability against such as creatures in the Inner Region, the LoD or the Eagle King. It has to fight a straight up Battle.

It says in the FAQ that the assassin can assassinate any creature regardless of weither or not it is drawn from the adventure deck or already faceup?

page 2

Where does it say the assassin can not assassinate the LoD?

It doesn't... and since we're already talking about changing the Assassin, the FAQs don't really matter anymore. This is about a very old House Rule regarding the terms attack vs attacked. It is one of the longest standing house rules for characters in the game. Any Enemy just drawn is on the attack rather than being attacked. Any creature generated by a card or space ... same thing, thereby that includes something like the LoD. The assassin can only assassinate when it is on the attack, and not when it is being attacked... no matter who or what the opponent is.

My group occasionally has someone who insists on playing the Assassin by its standard on its card. So we let that player do so... and the Assassin gets put in the hurt locker and set on fire at the first, second... twentieth opportunity by everyone at the table. Especially after that player has started to exploit assassination as if we didn't know exactly why s/he insisted on playing it by the card. Some players are just flat out to cocky to realize how stupid they are. I might guess that some here have run into this same issue to a lesser degree... or you just have group that are all a little tired of over-gunned characters.

Assassination is one of the worst, most misrepresented, and over abused abilities ever put on a character card. That's why so many people have tried to come up with alternatives, rewrites, house rules, etc.. But after 20 years and 4 editions (2 that I've now played regularly during different times in life), there's been no other attempted change to the Assassin that has ever achieved the correct balance. I've seen a lot of them, and only the "attacked vs attack" interpretation of Enemies, etc., just as for facing other characters, has been close enough. It also helps to balance out a few other Battle based abilities that get exploited in a similar fashion. But it allows the Assassin to take advantage of its ability when going after an exposed Enemy or another character... but not when attacked by another character or when logically on defense against other opponents and thereby unable to be sneaky. It's a real simple approach.

When two characters go at it, one is the attacker (on attack) and the other the attackee (being attacked). Apply the same consideration, logically, to any other Battle or Psychic Combat with any non-character opponent. The only challenge is to figure what criteria determines when a creature (a non-Enemy card opponent) is attacking or being attacked. Where Enemy cards are concerned, there is only one difference: was it drawn or already on the board. Occasionally a third issue comes up where an Enemy gets "magically" moved onto a characters space, in that case as well as when just draw, the Enemy is always on the attack. Where other opponents are generated by a space or non-Enemy card, the answer is obvious. The Assassin (or any character) doesn't know what's waiting for it until the opponent is generated. Thereby it has no opportunity to take its opponent unaware.

NOTE: There is one downside in that this limitation makes the exact same Assassin in 4ER less potent than in 2E. In 2E, there were more options for controlled movement without the use of Spells than there are in 4ER. In 2E, movement modifying cards (optional +1, +2, etc. to a roll) such as the Horse, Horse & Cart, etc. could allow a character to target face up Enemies more effectively. 4ER stripped mods from most such cards and even reduced their carrying capacity. IN the of the Horse having an optional +1 or +2 to movement rolls, it was given a doubled up random in 4ER. The Assassin's ability to target a face up Enemy by acquiring the right stuff to work in tandem with his ability is somewhat nerfed in 4ER... but then so are the options for all characters where movement is concerned.

JCHendee said:

Can you explain why the FAQs don't really matter anymore?

Because if you go by the card the assassin can. So I think it needs to be edited.

Uvatha said:

For the prupose of this thread the FAQ's do not apply as this thread is posted for the purpose of those who feel the assassin is too powerful and therefore want to come up with a homebrew alternative to the assassinate ability. If you do not wish to home brew the assassin then the FAQ is your friend otherwise the FAQ doesnt apply.

tjedgar said:

Ah, well I am of the mind that the FAQ does matter but not to the assassin ruling only because it sounds way to nasty and unfair to other characters in the game. So to me the FAQ is my friend but not the assassin ruling in the FAQ. We are capable of just taking the best while leaving the worse .

So to me the assassin can do everything in its ruling but not using its assassin ability on board creatures like the Lord of Darkness or the new eagle thing in Highlands etc etc. I want to run a league with Talisman at my local gaming club and its the only fair way to go .

Shame FF could not of seen this prob in game?

Uvatha said:

Worse, they did see, as it was implied in the FAQ question, and it has been asked or raised repeatedly over the years. It's strange that Talisman has had many little details change between 2E and 4ER and yet not this one. Oh well... we all have our ways to fix such glitches.

JCHendee said:

I suppose that the assassin only has one special ability compared to all the other characters. And Iike you said JC when players play the assassin by the FAQ then all the rest of the players go for him . Makes playing him in a league play rather counter productive.

True, so true, but some groups don't buy it. They'd rather see the characters properly balanced where the open challenges of the Land itself are concerned. And even when the Assassin is limited to when he can assassinate, he's still very potent, trust me.

Here is a roughed out House Rules card we use (when its just us long timers playing). Some of you may not be familiar with this type of card (I still have to finish its back side). Rules Cards are something a couple of us brewers came up with a while back for a more versatile way to use, mix, and match House Rules in units. I'll explain that another time, if and when anyone is interested. Right-Click and View/Save to see it at full print size.

I'm not suggesting others use this as is, but it might provide some ideas for those trying to find their own solution to such things as the assassination loophole.

Of late, there's been a wording shift in certain new characters. Such combat related abilities once worded as "when you attack / are attacking" are now worded something like "when you engage in [battle / Pyschic Combat]." The Highlander is one example.

It's a late term change versus other terms changes by FFG/BI when 4E and 4ER were first released. The reason is rather baffling, but it has been thought by some to be an attempt to solve the whole issue of confirming characters as always on the attack vs. Enemies and creatures as opposed to conditions required for engaging another character. But it doesn't do any good. One can "engage" or "be engaged," save as for "attack" or "be attacked". Our group, with a handful of part-time and pro authors, a long time small press publisher, and an editor for hire aren't buying it.