Chivalric Knight Rules Question

The cards states:

"If the Enemy is killed, you recieve 1 Quest Reward but you must miss your next turn."

Here is a situation i came across

6 player game

player 2 is the knight

Player 3 4 and 5 all encountered strength monsters and player 2 helped them all and recieved 3 rewards.

Does he only miss "his next turn" or does he miss the next 3 turns.

I would assume that since it specifically states next turn that he would only miss 1 turn especially since this doesnt happen much and is a rare occurance like other characters special ability bonuses.

Opinions?

Moggle121 said:

As a rule, if a Character is instructed to miss his next Turn and after that, while he's still "waiting to miss the turn", he's instructed to miss a turn again, the missed turns are resolved one after the other. It's the same that happens if a Character draws the Storm Event and the next one draws Siren. You miss two consecutive turns.

In your example, the Chivalric Knight must miss 3 consecutive Turns.

That's actually not correct. Missed turns do not stack in the game!!! In your example only one turn is missed (this came direct from John himself).

Ell.

talismanamsilat said:

You're right, you gave this clarification not too many posts ago, but I forgot. Missed turns do not stack.

Here's your statement:

new.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp

Chivalric Knight can help other Characters as many times in a row as he can and just lose one turn.

Highlander may charge in his Turn and in other Character Turns (if attacked) and still miss one Turn (his next).

Toads that are turned into Toads before reverting back to normal, they will be Toads for 3 more Turns only (as written in the Rulebook). If it happens on the first Turn, it's not 2+3 but only 3 Turns.

It's time for a new FAQ, I'm facing some difficulties remembering all these details...

Very happy to read this, as i posted the same question about the highlander some weeks ago, but back then people actually convinced me that the turns do stack, even though it still did not seem clear to me.

Highlander rules

Regards

Highlander missed turns do not stack either!

Ell.

talismanamsilat said:

That´s why he rules

Never thought that they did ( at least not with the highlander), but i think a lot of people can get confused about the whole "miss your next turn" thing ( mainly speaking for myself)

Regards

I would assume that the Warlock Quest where you miss two turns is the exception to this rule?

Yes that's an exception to the rule!

Ell.

Hi Elliot,

We have always played that missing turns will stack.

I ask the question to Jon New a long time ago, and he said that it was stacking.

So... missing (next) turns will not stack??

example: Academy card was always stacking turns, where you paid for etc

Chivalric should also stack his missing turns...

Academy text is clear and says "for every 3 Gold you pay you must miss a turn". No doubt that you can't miss multiple turns here, but it's not the same as "miss your next turn".

The Rulebook explains clearly what's going on in case of a toad-ed Toad: he does not stack his Turns as a Toad, he will be a Toad for the next 3 Turns. This is applicable also when it is said "miss your next Turn".

but you asked Elliott, so he's got the final word on this...

Oke guys,

I have mailed John Goodenough, because i wanted a 100% answer to know the truth about all this.

Here it is:

Rule Question:

Chivalric Knight+ missing 2 or more turns

Q - If the Chivalric Knight aid 2 different characters in a round, does he miss his next 2 turns or only 1 turn?

A: 2 turns

Q- Do missing turns stack?

A: Yes

Velhart said:

You seem to be the only one that regularly gets answers from John Goodenough, since he never answered what I asked him about 6 months ago.

I don't understand why a game designer takes the time to answer personally to queries, instead of putting them together in a comprehensive FAQ available to everyone. I'm pretty tired of searching these forums for clarifications, trying to figure out a coherent ruling and after months getting a completely different answer like this. I do not question what you're reporting because I know that you care for serious clarifications as much as I do, but what if someone claims "John Goodenough told me that..." and says what he likes the best instead? How can we be sure of the answers?

I trust Elliott Eastoe because I know he's involved in Talisman design and playtesting, but he has no final word and sometimes he's been contradicted by John himself. Why do they take so much time answering and contradicting themselves, while they could just collect questions and discuss answers together for everyone's sake?

Perhaps a FAQ is not on the priority list since no expansion was announced yet, but how long does it take to put together the mails/messages you've sent to different people and put them on a PDF? If done on a regular basis a FAQ would be in constant development. Now it takes time to dig into the threads and mails, but to resume the important topics and expand the actual FAQ, which is 2 years old, 5-6 hours of work are enough. Can we hope for a FAQ update, sooner or later?

Velhart said:

Velhart said:

This is a complete U-Turn on what was agreed during the development and playtest phase of the game.

To give a slight comparison, if a player is a Toad and he gets Toaded again, he is only a Toad for 3 turns from that point on. In other words turns as a Toad do not stack and this is official lol!

Ell.

Thanks Warlock for the compliment! I'm currently designing a huge FAQ covering every eventuality, as I have kept every question ever asked on here, during playtest and everywhere else. It's a PDF with the Talisman watermark just like my list of components for the game!!!

Ell.

talismanamsilat said:

I knew you were working on a project like this and hope that you soon get it released.

The problem that I see with Talisman is that it's treated by FFG like a best-selling game but not a proprietory designed game, therefore the support and care for rule clarification is minimal and mostly left to people like you and Jon, who have a great knowledge of the game since the 80s and show a constant dedication to its improvement. Your daily commitment is remarkable, but if it doesn't turn out to be something official there's still room for "U-turns" like this.

I don't know why the revised FAQ has been delayed so long, there should be a reason for it. I will risk being boring, but for a game like Talisman, which has an incredible variety of combinations, this type of clarification is necessary. FAQs have been prepared for all FFG games and most of them are good as they are; you don't find too many unanswered game issues while playing.When we play Arkham Horror and a question raises, Rulebook + FAQ have always been sufficient. With Talisman I say "discussion on forum brought to..., but it's still not clarified" and I hope this could be improved by your work as latter expansions were.

Wouldn´t the text have said "Miss a turn" and not " miss your next turn" if the number of turns was supposed to stack, just like the academy does?

Regards