I've won a few games by Toadifying the Lord of Darkness and then boosting in some way to blast through to the CoC from the Dungeon, and my wife complained that it's cheesy to do that (and I agree, it is). We're going to house rule that you can't toadify the LoD... although I think we'll still allow zero-result wins (finger of death, soul shatter spells) since that exits you to the Crags.

What do you think of those rulings? It seems that by standard rules, the LoD can be toadified, but I think we're going to disallow that.

Why don't just consider winning against a toadified LoD as a zero-result win?

More curious, what combination of expansions are you using and which characters, if you're regularly getting Toadify? Pre-Highland, it's 90 card deck with 2 Toadify in there I think. Not to mention if she knows what you like to do, seeing you hit the Dungeon, she should/could be holding Counterspell.

Counterspell is a good idea, but it is not so common a card.

I tend to play spellcasters when I can, and as such, a toadify spell comes into my hand here and there. I have all expensions and play with all of them. It happens more often than you might think, if you play often (10-15 games per week probably).

Zapranoth said:

Unless I'm mistaken (happens once every century or so ), CS is just as common as Toadify, so I don't see why you get one more often than the other. Unless you're the one shuffling the Spell deck and are arrenging it so that Toadify is toward the top .

Zapranoth said:

Another reason to go with random characters IMO. And by random I mean fully random, say a number between 1 and X (can't recall how many characters there are now with HL added in), shuffle and deal out that character. You called it, you play it. None of that picking a character or semi-random (deal 2-3, choose from those), the latter being mentioned in the rules as an alternative rule.

Hey Dam, a gaming question if you will. In our group, we do random as well, and, (I don’t know the English word for it, since this one is wrong) but we have “persistence” in that, if we get a low end character, say, the priest, we try our best anyways.

However, another group of Talisman players, one of them my wife’s friend, not sure why I’m specifying but there you go, brought a point. We won’t do it, but here we go, he said…

“Random? What’s the point? At the start, you rush the Sentinel 4 times and you’re dead. You get a new character. All by the rules. And STILL, you’re far less behind taking the 1-5 turns walking to the Sentinel, then charging the sentinel 4 times, then dying, then trading in the Priest for, say, the Prophetess or whoever you get randomly… rather than sticking to a loser character like the Priest for a game. So, might as well save people the delay of 5-9 turns, that’s meaningless anyways, but its useless ‘pumpkinseed in teeth’ annoyance and give them the character they want in the first place.”

I’m asking the question to you because since you seem very “end game” focused; is there a strategic reason where that is sound? My wife, myself, and our group of Talisman players will still “stick to” the drawn character. But, with full disclaimer, I don’t like that friend of my wife’s so I’d love if I could bring to the table, next week, any gameplay counterarguments on that not being a good strategy.

Moral arguments won’t hold against this guy, I’m looking for a strategic counterpoint. To rip off a movie/TV quote, when I go “You shot him in the back!” he goes “I’m just sorry he wasn’t asleep.” kind of guy.

Anyhow, if you don’t mind letting me know if “Character reboots” in-game are ever done in your circle, or if there’s a feasible rules or tactical reason why it shouldn’t be done, that would be great.

Wiping the smirk off that friends face is just a bonus… honest… heh.

That's why we play the Bloodbath mode. Yay!

Well, there is no guarantee the new character will be that much better. Depending on how you play with regard to the just dead char, could even re-draw it. Hell, I still fondly recall the time I drew Witch Doctor 4 times in a game and I wasn't even trying to suicide him, he just couldn't get off the blocks so to speak. Yes, you can suicide in about 1-5 turns, but what if the second char is a sucker as well? Soon it's 10 turns wasted (without drawing any Adventure cards, since you're just hitting the Sentinel). There was actually one time I kept track of the character turns in a game (yes, I'm THAT anal).

*digs around*

Okay, looks like it was Druid vs Wizard vs Ghoul. Druid reached the CoC on turn 43 (Inner Region on turn 35). Wizard got to the CoC on turn 46, Druid dies on turn 51. Ghoul dies to the Command Spell on turn 76.

I know it's just one game, but say you "waste" 5-10 turns suiciding, looking for the better character? You've used up 1/4 of the turns available.

We stick with the char we drew, trying to make the most of it. Hell, winning with the Priest, there is no higher accolade in Talisman ! The opposite can take place and quite often does in fact. Opposite meaning someone gets one of the better chars, the other two hit him as often as possible, looking to kill the char, forcing a re-draw, hopefully a weaker character. Amazon is especially good in this when going up against 2/4 top characters (Gypsy, Sage, even Warlock if he drops to the Outer Region or she can get to the Middle fast).

Nice story and good explanation. Thanks Dam.

Oh, and I remember you saying about the Witch Doctor x4. Keep telling that story because it's certainly one for the books.

Thanks again for your time.