Hello all,

There are many variables within a game of Talisman - the random drawing from a well-shuffled adventure deck, the rolling of dice, etc. For every tablespoon of strategy (the will of the adventurer) there are ten gallons of of chance (the will of the universe in which the adventurers live). This is all part of what makes Talisman great and quite unique from many modern games.

Variables are the unknown; the unknown often manifests itself as the back of a card.

Spells are the only "player controlled" variables of this sort, in that players cannot know which ones another player has. For this reason, spells have always been one of my favorite parts of Talisman, because I cannot calculate a likely outcome when they are involved.

This is not so with objects and followers:

+ opponent is a strength 5 warrior

+ with a sword and an axe.

+ The mercenary follows him and will remain loyal due to his pile of gold.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= 10 possible strength in combat pre-roll. 11 to 16 post-roll

I say all this to ask you home-brewing folk if you've thought of concealing, rather that revealing, objects and followers. I haven't gone too in depth with rule-making for this manner of playing. Would it bring up too many problems with the existing standard rules? I just thought I might see if anyone has ever had similar thoughts on the matter, and I'd be interested to hear opinions.

Thanks!

-MD

The problem is that when such cards as Objects and Followers are drawn how does anyone else know that's what you've just placed face down next to your character? There is no check and balance that can be established for the moment of the actual draw. Much as I'm not a fan of the "god's eye" view of players vs. what other characters have or don't have, it is the cleanest and simplest way to play with out too many complications.

Talisman is not the only game load to the side of chance vs. strategy. It is not at all unique this, especially not vs. most US made games. The real problem is that the odds of losing a combat here are skewed by too small a range of probability. With combat based on only a die six, there are only 5 (not 6) increments to achieve for an automatic win. You're same scenario changes radically if you simply do one thing. Try the same combat with 2D6.

Not only is the range to a any automatic win now 11 increments, the chance of a win is slightly more stable. Mid range roll results become more common and extremes more rare, whereas on one die, all results have equal chance. The difference between these two reflects the better application of skill and resources applied in an character attribute bases contest vs a general challenge or an opponent rolling counter to a character. The downside is that most players of games heavily loaded to chance think that more dice means more complication (seriously), which of course isn't true. But that's the way of it.

My group has tried the hidden equipment and resources option. We had little problem with it though it was cumbersome to teach to new players. And Talisman is built so that you don't have to really think a lot, and that actually has its deserving place. It's purely escapist in its simplicity. The only way to work hidden objects/followers (and avoid someone taking a nasty card drawn and just hiding it as a claimed "object" to get rid of later in some way) is as follows:

1. when and object or follower is drawn, claim so and place it face down next to your character.
2. you may only use it by displaying it for use when needed.
3. if another character encounters you, it has the option to look at all our hidden cards (except for spells) after its player declares to be encountering your character.
4. only that player may look at your hidden cards; no player may pass such information to others.
5. only the objects/followers you choose to use during that forced encounter need to be displayed.

Very fussy, isn't it? We've made it work, but I don't recommend it, especially to those obsessed with the fastest possibly game. Of course we're not concerned with that... and no, we don't play this approach often. We have a better solution that sticks to Talisman's simplicity.

I do recommend you try the 2D6 combat option at least once and see what you think.

You can also add the auto-win / auto-lose option on a natural 2 or 12 respectively. There are also options of a tie on auto-win/lose rolls, but most prefer to just call them a auto-draw and keep it simple.

Thanks for the reply JC.

The 2d6 idea sounds interesting. I'm definitely going to try it out over the next few games.

Your points regarding conceal vs. reveal make sense - I can see how playing like this could be quite messy. Perhaps splitting the adventure deck into two categories would help. One for enemies, strangers & places, and another for objects. The first category of cards would always be revealed when drawn, and the second would be concealed. Of course one would need to figure out rules for when to draw which.

I agree that hidden cards would need to be revealed at times, but only the ones that are currently being used.

Anyway, thanks again!

-MD

I wouldn't be too worried about people cheating by hiding cards they weren't supposed to, but I would definitely restrict further which cards could be hidden. For instance I don't think any follower could be hidden, as it would be pretty hard for someone not to see a group of people/creatures trailing after you. Same goes for horses, mules etc. In fact pretty much anything that you couldn't believably fit in a bag would be a hard one for me to see as being "hidden". That being said, if you had a bag of carrying or some such, I could easily believe anything in that was hidden until used in an encounter.

But it seems to me that all of this would get to be too cumbersome anyway.

I really like the idea of using 2d6 for combat though, along with auto win/lose conditions for perfect (or perfectly horrible) rolls as this would ensure an element of risk/hope for any fight depending on which side of it you are on.

BRASKY said:

Except it isn't about what "players" see... it's about what other "characters" would see... and they wouldn't see anything from outside one's current space. On the other hand, it's a very cumbersome approach, and leaving Followers visible would less the fuss quite a bit.

BRASKY said:

It also means there will be no auto kills for beefed up characters drawing a weak enemy. They will always have to roll. This may seem to some to slow down the latter half of the game, but in play it was found to add very little to the length of a game. But be prepared for whining from "race" obsessed players.

True enough. I can definitely understand where you're coming from with hiding the followers because of this but at the same time I could also imagine that the followers would be known as they would be a part of the characters impressive and ever-growing reputation. I imagine the entire realm would hear the story of the minstrel who had somehow convinced a prince to follow him, or the warrior that fought side by side with a unicorn.

Admittedly this is a bit of a flawed argument as possession of magical objects would just as likely add to an adventurers reputation. I guess I'll have to do a lot of considering on different game mechanics and the fun factor before I try implementing this.

My gut feeling is that it will be more trouble than it is worth, but it does have its appealing aspect as far as adding a little more mystery to player interaction.

As to the 2d6 combat variant, luckily my play group isn't obsessed with playing the fastest game possible so this shouldn't be a problem at all to implement. Also, I think it will make the game more interesting as the player dominating the game may still find himself losing a life to a lowly boar. It always gets a little boring when someone can run around the board auto-killing 80% of the creatures.

BRASKY said:

Oh... you're preaching to the choir here. That part has bugged me since the days of 2E's debut.

How about players showing everyone what objects/followers they get, as normal, but then placing them face-down, only revealing them again when using them, or when losing a combat to another character. It would be hard to remember everything that everyone has when playing with 4 or more people.

That was the way we did it when we were testing this option out. And it works out okay. There was a bit fuss for those players who grabbed a mule and cart, loaded it up, and then couldn't remember all the stuff they had on it vs what their character was carrying. But hey, too bad for the hoarders.

If it ain't broke don't fix it!

Ell.

"Broke" is a matter of perspective here.

It might be better to say that nothing is ever going to be perfect for everyone, and maybe Talisman is as close as it can get for most. I might not personally agree with that, especially in comparing minor differences between editions, but it's certainly conversation piece rather than dismissive.