So all three of these questions came up in our last game and were not resolved to everyone's satisfaction:

1. If a player has the amulet, can summoned creatures still attack him? Can a player still use Psionic Blast (since the spell states "You may cast this spell on yourself")

2. If a player has the amulet, can the genie still cast spells for him?

3. If a player has the poltergeist, does he still technically roll for movement and then have it reduces to 1? (in case he gets a 1 and can then move the reaper)

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Summoned creatures cannot attack him because he is immune to spells (and that includes those spells' effects). I know in games like MtG there is a distinction between being immune to an effect and being immune to being targeted by an effect, but Talisman isn't one of those games - it's a simple game and immunity to spells gives you total immunity.

He cannot use psionic blast because he cannot cast spells and he is immune to spells. So the amulet prevents him twice actually.

Yes, the amulet prevents only the character. However, if the genie casts a beneficial spell on the character, the spell will have no effect.

With poltergeist you don't roll for move. You will not move the reaper, and if you are a troll you will not regenerate.

Caliban said:

As far as I know, the Amulet protects you from Spells, which means you cannot be the target of any Spell except the Command Spell. But if another player is the target, there's nothing your Amulet can do. He can attack you and gain benefit from Psionic Blast or Summoned Creatures. If you attack him, he can Evade you with Invisibility. The Amulet is not a "dispel magic" artefact, but a protection (prevents Random, Immobility, Mesmerism, Acquisition, Nullify and other nasty Spells they can cast at you).

Caliban said:

Yes, again the Amulet is not a "dispel magic" artefact. But the Genie can't cast Healing, Psionic Blast or other Spells at your Character. But he can Summon creatures and these creatures may fight at your side.

Caliban said:

He won't roll the die, but just move 1 space. This has an impact on the Reaper Rule.

I would allow the Player to roll the die to move the Reaper, though. I don't see a reason why Death should wait if a Character is slowed down by the Poltergeist. But just a plain roll to see if the Reaper is activated, nothing else (i.e. Troll Regeneration). Same will I do with Blizzard; a Blizzard stops Death for 2 complete rounds? No, it can't be.

I agree with Warlock on his answers to questions 1 and 3, but I believe that number 2 has been answered incorrectly.

The Genie Card states:

The Genie has 3 Spells; take them from the Spell deck, look at them, and place on this card. The Genie will cast the Spells whenever you wish; treat the Spells as though you had cast them. The Genie spirits off to the discard pile when the last Spell is cast.

The Amulet Card states:

You cannot cast Spells , including the Command Spell. No Spells will affect you, other than the Command Spell.

If the spells cast by the Genie act as if they are cast by you, then in my interpretation considering the Amulet states that the holder may not cast spells, you can't cast spells from the Genie when you have the Amulet.

SubElement said:

Well, you're right then. It would have been a nice combination Genie + Amulet.

Anyway, card text is clear enough and was probably intended to avoid spellcasting while having the Amulet.

A question raises. A Character can cast how many Spells he has at the beginning of his Turn. It looks like every Spell you cast through the Genie counts like a Spell you've just cast.

If the Wizard has two Spells, casts one of them and another with the Genie, he can't cast a third Spell for that Turn, neither his last Spell nor another Genie Spell. Is it correct?

I would guess that if the Wizard has two spells and a genie with three more then the Wizard therfore has 5 spells in total and can cast all 5 in a turn

Geoff

i add, if you are in the cursed glade, the amulet has no effect and you can receive or cast spells (not cast in fact)

(to pick up the amulet for example !)

Cidervampire said:

The Wizard would only be able to cast 2 Spells on his turn. The Genie's Spells belong to the Genie.

Thanks for all the answers. It cleared things up. Although, I did ask part of my first question unclearly:

If a player has the amulet, can another character that is fighting him use Psionic Blast? Someone above made it sound like he or she could, along with spells like invisibility. This seems like applying MtG rules of targeting and such where as long as the possesor of the amulet is not the "target", then the spell could be used but, in Talisman, those rules probably don't apply.

The player who had the amulet in our game was arguing the amulet card literally, where if it wasn't the command spell, no spell could be used against him whether it targeted him, the character he was fighting or a summoned monster.

No the player was wrong, based on your new description. The amulet prevents the owner from both casting spells and being directly effected by spells.

If another player casts a spell that effects themselves (Psychic Blast) then it is not under the effect of the amulet. Think of it like this, if the spell's description does not hinder or enhance the opposing player directly, it is not nulified by the amulet.

Your player was not staying within the spirit of the game, he basically was over thinking the effects of the amulet.

talismanamsilat said:

But the wizard could cast his two and the genie cast his three in the same turn? That's what I meant

The Genie text states that you " treat the Spells as though you had cast them ".

According to the rules: " The maximum number of Spells a character may cast during his turn is equal to the number of Spells he had at the start of that turn. "

In your example, the Wizard only HAS 2 spells, so may only cast 2 in that turn. The spells held by the Genie are not possessed by the Wizard, but they are CAST by him.

So in other words, the Wizard may only cast 2 of the 5 spells in his play area.

talismanisland said:

So any char with Craft 2 or less that picks up the Genie can only cast Genie's Spell during another char's turn? I mean, 1-2 Craft means you can have 0 Spells, but doesn't prohibit you from casting those held by the Genie AFAIK. Since you start each of your turns with 0 Spells, you can cast 0 Spells on your turn, 1 on another char's turn.

Dam said:

Rules say:

All characters may acquire and cast Spells, if their Craft is sufficient to permit this.

A Character with 1-2 Craft may have 0 Spells and should discard Spells exceeding this number (= any Spell he may possess, e.g. he was Craft 3 and came back to 2; this implies Spell discarding).

The Genie is the owner of his Spells and they needn't be discarded, but the Character with 1-2 Craft can't cast them at all. He may cast the Spells he has at the start of (any) Turn. In this case, he has no Spell of his own and can't cast the Genie Spells as well, because they count as Spells cast by the Character. In other players' turn, he still has 0 Spells at the start of the turn (1 is a limit that should be applied in addition to base requirement).

This Genie issue is interesting. If you can't cast Spells, you have no benefit from the Genie.

Aladdin would have been helpless against Vizier Jafar.

The_Warlock said:

One has to wonder if that was the intent of the Genie, "have" Spells you can't use.

talismanisland said:

No offence but this sounds like balls to me. So if your character has no spells you can't use the Genie spells in your own turn

Not according to the rules, no.

Dam said:

I meant when a low-Craft (1-2 Craft) char draws Genie. You can't even chuck him at the Vampire, since with 1-2 Craft you're not taking the Craft-path.

It doesn't make the Genie useless though. Just not much use at that particular time, just like drawing a Talisman on the frst move of the game isn't going to help you until later.

Either way, the rules/cards suggest that is what is done. It will be cleared up at some point. A FAQ will be coming...

talismanisland said:

I have to differ on the Genie issue. Maybe it comes from being an English professor, but the text of the cards are pretty clear.

Amulet: You cannot cast Spells... no Spells will affect you.

Genie: The Genie has 3 Spells... The Genie will cast the Spells whenever you wish.

Obviously the Genie is not you , and can therefore cast his spells. The tricky part comes from the reminder text in parenthesis on the Genie: treat the Spells as though you had cast them.

Here we come to a seeming paradox. You could not have cast the spells. And yet by the time this reminder comes into play, it is for targeting purposes, number of spells per round purposes (meaning if you had a spell in hand at the beginning of the turn, you cannot later cast it that turn after the Genie casts a spell), and for simple effect purposes, to determine who the "you" is on the cast spells.

Due to the verb tense on the cards, however, this seeming paradox is easily resolved. The Genie casts the spell. That much is clear, because neither the amulet nor Dispel Magic prevents castings by a follower, which is precisely what the Genie does, according to its card. Following this you must treat the spells not as though you are casting them (note the tense here), which would have prevented their being cast, but as though you had cast them. Essentially, the spell is on its way to the target as though you had cast the spell, and then immediately picked up the amulet, preventing you from casting/being affected by spells.

This does create some interesting effects however, because any of the Genie's spell effects that would affect you , simply do not work.

For example, you can use the Genie to cast Enrich while holding the amulet, but no gold is gained. Acquisition works fine (targets an Object). Summon Serpent works almost perfectly normally, except that the "your turn immediately ends" phrase goes away, meaning that if you use it to beat the first of two goblins on the Ruins space, you will then encounter goblin number two.

Additionally, from a "realism" perspective, there's no reason in the world why an anti-magic amulet that only affects you and specifically does not affect your followers, would prevent a spellcasting Genie from casting spells on your behalf. If your followers can be mesmerised away from you while you wear the amulet, then they can certainly cast spells of their own, because it's established that in the world of Talisman, there is no anti-magic field affecting or protecting them.

Perhaps from an in-game perspective, it would be clearer if I said that it seems like the Genie is a Craft 6 follower who can cast spells at your command (and with you and the beneficiary of any good effects). There's no reason a Troll couldn't tell the Genie to "gimme golds, blue guy!" and the Genie casts enrich on the Troll. Telling someone to do something doesn't require that the commander be able to do it himself. A quadriplegic could order his servant to go kick and punch someone, for example.

talismanisland said:

librarycharlie said:

Ummm, 2 Goblins fight as one, so the Serpent should either win or lose against their combined Str of 4.

Another question about the Amulet.

Can you cast spells against the bearer of the Amulet to burn a spell? The amulet says spells do not affect you rather than spells cannot be cast on you

I have a question about spells.

I am always thinking about this.

If you may take a spell card(gain) from the spell deck, but you have already as much spells as you can have, can you still take a spell card from the spell deck and discard a spell that you want?

Or can't you take a spell card because you hold already enough spells as your craft permits?