My husband and I are thinking about buying Runebound, but the kid at the gamestore who sold us Talisman says that Runebound is just a less fun version of Talisman. He says that Talisman "doesn't take itself too seriously," while Runebound, I guess, does. I wish I'd asked him what he meant by that.

To anyone who plays both, which do you prefer?

My wife and I play both. If you are familiar with FRPG, then Runebound is a simplified board and card approach to a fantasy style quest in a make believe world where there's a ultimate bad guy to seek out and defeat.

Indeed, it is not as whimisical as Talisman, but I would hardly call it less fun. And Talisman is not even close to the ultimate of whimiscal. So for someone who works in a game store, your salesperson wasn't very knowledgeable. The true measure of nonsense as fun would be MUNCHKINS.

RB is more complicated than Talisman, but not by as much as it might seem. It has its random side, but provides much more decision making, where some true strategy and tactics become obvious to even beginning players. Versus RB, Talisman is almost utterly random, and what strategy (and even less tactics) it offers, most people cannot see... and these don't actual have a lot influence on who wins. RB takes longer to play but is more satisfying for those wanting something akin to High or Epic Fantasy adventure... and I know a little tiny bit about that. (See the links in my sig.)

RB does not learn on PvP or CvC to counter monotony for repeated and simple rote cards. It is very much a competition in which it is also possible for all adventurers to lose (but not that often). It is also a tougher game, and you don't get to pick up equipment and gold just lying around; you have to work for everything, and even the few freebies that might come up may cost you something you don't expect... or save your hide in way you couldn't have guessed. Maybe that's why your advisor didn't think it was as much fun - you have to think a bit. Overall, I prefer RB, though I like Talisman, but my schedule doesn't often allow a window for a game of RB. But if you're into a challenge for a change of pace...

One can learn it as one goes; for your first game after one read through the manual, don't even worry about finishing the first game and just wander and have fun learning it. Oh, fair warning, the manual is even more convoluted and in need a decent editor than the one for Talisman, but you'll survive that (and its not as bad as the one for Arhkam.) There are tons of expansions for it from simple deck suppliments, to card based supplements that change the endgame, to large ones that actual introduce you to a new "land" with new adventures. We've owned the base game for about 6 months and played about 8 games. We play rather leisurely and slow, to enjoy it, but you still expect to put in more time for an RB game than Talisman.

One a scale of 1 to 10, I personally might give Talisman 4ER a 6 or 7 (maybe an 8 for the old 2E version with all expanions except TimeScape). I'd give Runebound an 8 (at least) on just its base game. And in the end, TM and RB are not really as comparable as some people think based on any possible common mechanics and the look of art and components. Some of the difference are in the play and the mindset. Some people want more escapism and just a night of mindless surprises and laughs, others want more challenge and adventure; and there are people who different nights for each as well.

What's the story on downtime JC? I've read many times that people really prefer to limit RB to max 3-player, else the downtime becomes too much (for them). Talisman I know has very little downtime (at least in 3-p), turns come fast and furious.

To say is shortly : Runebound has the better combat and the better trading system. Talisman has the better encounters. There are no tables to roll on strangers and places in Runebound. In Runebound there must be a fight at the end of the players movement, even if you draw an event, afterwards you draw another card until you get a fight. 90% of the encountercards are combats.

all items and followers are in the 8 cities to buy and sell.

If you buy and play Runebound after you played Talisman you will like the combat and trading system, maybe even think about how to involve that into Talisman, but you will miss the masses of different and fun encounters.

I've only played Runebound once or twice, so take my opinion with salt...

Generally speaking I prefer games with more strategy - some of my favourites are Axis & Allies, Diplomacy, and Titan. (Talisman is the least strategic of all the games I play regularly). But despite this I find Talisman much more fun than Runebound.

1. First, there is more PvP (including CvC) in Talisman. This is a huge part of gaming for me - interacting with my opponents. I don't play solitaire.
2. Talisman seems to have more character diversity and more variety concerning turns and encounters.
3. I found it harder in RB to catch up when you're behind. In fact, the exception to Runebound lacking PvP is the ease at which a character can attack another character. This makes it even harder to catch up, because the weaker player will either lose their good stuff to the stronger players, or end up having unproductive turns in order to avoid the stronger characters.
4. The Downtime is significant in RB. Though I don't mind this in some games, when there is little interaction between players (as in RB) downtime is extra tedious because what the other players are doing is less relevant.

There are some pros for Runebound.

• I simply love the movement system. That said, I find (as cool as it is) that it gives too much control over movement, making it too hard to avoid more powerful characters.
• The combat system is much more interesting in RB. But the combat in Marvel Heroes is very similar but much more interesting (and strategic), so I don't really miss the Runebound combat.
• Runebound is more strategic, but I still wouldn't consider it a deep strategy game. If I want Strategy there are better games, while if I want a lighter fun adventure style game I'd prefer Talisman.

My advise - If you mostly play with just the two of you, you may have a lot of fun with RB. But if you usually play with company I would recommend Middle Earth Quest for a more detailed and interesting Adventure style game, or Cosmic Encounter if you want a whole new gaming experience and a change of pace. Cosmic Encounter is very fun, fast, and interactive with simple rules but profound strategic variables. You can read all about it here , here , or here , or try a (very basic) version online free here .

Best of luck!

JCHendee said:

While Munchkin Quest is clearly sillier than Talisman, I think it's at least as complicated and strategic - maybe more so.

RB allows you to pick the level of risk for your encounters whereas in Talisman you can easily run into a S7 Dragon when you've just started up.

The downtime is in RB a killer. You might want to startify the Movement and Encounters to different phases. Same total amount of downtime, but you'll be doing things on a more regular basis, so it doesn't feel quite so long. I'd also recommend level ups require XP = your current level, ratehr than 4 XP = level up. This cripples leaders whilst allowing low level characters some kind of chance to catch up. I've hacked around RB a lot to turn it into a game that is more palatable for my gang, though it still takes way too long to play.

Personally I don't care about what people call downtime; I watch those other stories unfold and see whose gotten a leg up on winning the game. And I'm not saying others here are as ridiculous as some I've encounter. But some don't belong in RB, as I've seen 8 years olds with more patience if not far less pure self-interest. It's true that RB does have fewer chances for CvC - because you are moving about in a large land. Since when should the be consider downtime? But it is also because you won't want to waste your time, as the opportunities for advancement and a win will not be found in attacking over characters... although RB has a bit more to offer in the way the character interaction options when they happen. It can even be played semi cooperatively

As another counterpoint, RB does not fake in PvP as a false constuct replacement for CvC. The Class Decks were one of the few add ons that tried this, and it didn't go over well.. Too bad, because the basics of the class/skill/feat system were okay, though I never thought this approach was warranted in FRPG anyway. But the Class decks also stuffed in an attempt at players holding and playing cards against each - yet another demigodhood mechanic that felt forced, like all other such approaches. Even players wanting such forms of interaction (vs the real kind) in the end didn't care for it or tried to strip it out without removing hte C/S/F altogether.

THere are people who enjoy both games if they can wrap the heads around the differences in the game, what they really mean, and the actual different mindset required to enjoy them. Each game is a different approach, and of course a different complexity. There are also those who simply prefer one over the other. And there's only one way to find out that and our discussion really WON'T tell someone else what kind of player they really are.

But my opinion on downtime with people around the table is... if you can't enjoyment watching other stories develop ... go back to your video games where you won't have to waste you time. When you learn to play RB well, the "downtime" is about half as much as people complain about.

And Jenna... the best way to try would indeed be with just your husband. See how you feel about it after that. I've played with up to 5 people, and it was a very long game. I didn't care; neither did anyone else at the table, though maybe it was a rather short night's sleep after that. 4 is the recommended maximum count for competent players. Until you feel competent (let alone decide if it's for you), just keep it as the "special" game for only you and the hubby.

JCHendee said:

Just to be clear I'm very patient when it comes to downtime. I've played multiway Titan and frequently had more than an hour straight in downtime, yet it's one of my very favourites.

I don't play video games, but sometimes adventure games seem no more interactive - each player is on their own, essentially playing solo, and racing to finish faster than the opposition. Adventure games have the sort of interaction which exists in golf - when you're behind, play risky; when you're ahead, play safe. Beyond that (in golf) there is little consideration of your opponent during your turns.

Of course Runebound does feature interaction more direct than the golf sort, but not enough for my liking. Generally the more interaction in a game, the greater my tolerance for downtime. In some games you couldn't begin to plan your own turn without careful consideration of your opponents' positions. In these games, I am keen to watch how the game develops on another player's turn. Runebound has less interaction than Talisman, so I would want less downtime and not more.

Cosmic Encounter has both more interaction and less downtime than Talisman, so I renew my recommendation. But it comes down to personal tastes.

Thanks, everyone. We'll probably give Runebound a try. I play most games with just my husband, and downtime, if there's any between two players, wouldn't be a problem for us.

The thing I love most about Talisman is the variety of characters. I understand there's not as much of a variety in Runebound, but do you think that there will be an expansion with more characters? And are all the characters in Runebound the same as the characters from Descent? Or are there are few that are different?

JCHendee said:

Oh, cool! We have your books at the library I work at. I thought I knew your name from somewhere.

I think I found your livejournal blog a few months ago, too, when I was googling other Talisman fans. Awesome, awesome stuff.

Jenna said:

There are already several expansions for Runebound and yes they all add more characters (I think 24 now but not sure of that total). Yes they are the same or similar to Decent because it is the same "world". There are 3 separate games that all take place in the Runebound World based on the same characters, each played in a different format.

I have not yet played Runebound, but a member of our group has all the expansions. Unlike Talisman, they don't add to the board, but stack on the other boards, creating what I am told is a whole new adventure.

-Salute

Expansions for Runebound and quite diverse and plentiful. You might want to look at Ameritrash's RB shopping guide for future recommendations on which ones you should buy first based one which dimensions of the game you want to augment. The big box expansions all include a board overlay to adventure in whole new land. A few groups actually figured out a way to use multiple boards, traveling from one land to the next, but I've heard one has to be a little flexible to make it work.

And FFG is stil producing new expansions for RB. Happy adventuring!!!

Um I didn't see anything on her signature.

What did she write, now I am really curious.

ASIDE: Oh, and thanks to you, Jenna, as libraries that have our work are always wonderful to hear about. Barb and I appreciate our readers very much, whether borrowing or buying a book. Without them, we couldn't keep doing what we're doing. Being in any library is always high mark to any writer with half a brain.