I am wondering how other people look to the cards.

Do you like the new artwork or are you missing something.

i must say, that they are cards that i like and don't like.

(for a example) If you look at a goblin from the third edition and a goblin from this edtion, then i miss the artwork from the old series.

And the dragon ( they are 3 cards from it into the deck !) is also not scary. The picture from the 2th edition is even beter with old artwork !

I bought today the Reaper version. I look at the cards, and have a chimera in the hand. The first i think is: **** he looks too cute. why, he is a enemy etc. Chimera's wants to rip your head off lol.

The problem is, that it is too modern. And they are not many scary cards from what i say.. WOW

Are there more players who are missing this sort of pictures.

Nope..

Love the artwork. Did not like 3rd edition art. Loved the game!

Third edition is when I discovered the game so it holds a special place for me. However, I do like the artwork for this edition more than the third edition. When I comapre the 2 side by side the third edition artwork seems very 'childish' and too bright.

Do not like the 3rd edition artwork at all, would not buy the game because of it.

1st/2nd edition artwork for me but as has been said before, it is proabably down to the fact that it was my first.... and that is a real factor.

I think Gary Chalk's artwork has real charm to it.

The new cards, I don't have them yet so can't really comment. From what I have seen, hey look pretty nice, if a little generic.

I started with second edition, and for its time (and the fact that I was really young) I loved the artwork. I never played 3rd edition, but since getting back with the FFG's version of the game, I pulled up pictures to get an idea of what it was like. I really disliked that style of art. For me, the current edition has the best art by far. I'm a huge fan of D&D art, and the Talisman stuff is very similiar. I like the more realistic look of the monsters. So for me, the best art would be the current, the worst art was 3rd edition (Way too cartoony, and sometimes hard to make out) and that leaves 2nd edition in the middle (Classic, yet not sophisticated enough when compared to current games).

The third edition is the first game from talisman that i have played.

I like the art a lot.

But don't get me wrong, i like the 4th edition too !

It's just that i like cards that have a serious or scary look. Both editions have nice cards.

After all, the gameplay is the most important thing in the game, don't you think

And we can't look into the future, but let's hope that FF will produce a lot of expansions with interesting cards.

I can't edit my last post so i post again..

Here i have a more serious chimera as it should be.

I won 2nd, 3rd, and 4th edition. I NEVER cared for the artwork for 3rd. It looks way too childish.

Furthermore, I don't own any of the expansions for the 3rd edition, opting to buy the missing expansions for 2nd instead, but there was 1 thing about 3rd I always hated.

You have so many cards to go through before you get to the Dragon King, so if you played the game enough, you ALWAYS knew what was going to happen, in the order it was going to happen in. At least in 2nd and 4th, you choose a path (depending on which attribute you want to go by.)

And if you had Adventure, well, that void might be right around the corner...

I have a fondness for the 2nd ed artowrk, because that is what MOST of my games have been played on, but I think the artwork for 4th ed is absolutely beautiful.

Don't forget there is a dragon tower expansion in the third edition..

I must say that the dragon tower is far more interesting than walking always the same spaces in the inner region( you know what you get) ( But that is my opinion

(With the dragon tower you must make your way to the third floor and underway you must draw dungeon adventure cards. And that is random

Velhart said:

(With the dragon tower you must make your way to the third floor and underway you must draw dungeon adventure cards. And that is random

See, that, to me, is interesting. The only thing is I have never been able to afford a lot of the older expansions because the prices for them are always ridiculously high. My hope has been that with the release of 4th ed, some of the older expansions and editions I don't have will drop, marginally. Maybe someday I'll have those in my hands, but as it was, and is, by far, my least favorite ed to play, it will be the last on my list.

Held a punched 1st ed in my hands at last year's Gencon. 110 bucks, and I had the cash. I'm still kicking myself for NOT buying it....

But the difference between talisman 1st edition and 2th edition is not so much is it? Or is it just for the collecting?

I thought that they release it because the first one is out of print or something and bring it back with a second one...

Velhart said:

Well, I am a collector, but I believe the differences between 1st and 2nd edition was the fact that the cards had no coloring on them, vs where in 2nd ed, they are color. Not sure about rules differences - didn't have an opportunity to really scour through the thing.

Willing to bet talismanisland might be able to shed some light...

galladril said:

The main differences, apart from the colouring, are the Wand being altered from giving you an EXTRA Spell and the Command Spell was changed to affect ALL other Characters, rather than just one.

Just to say, I have a 1st edition Talisman, and the cards do have colour... I'm not too sure myself what the difference between 1st and 2nd editions are, never having owned the 2nd.

The Character cards in 1st Edition have colour, but the Adventure type cards do not.

Have a look at the World Tour section of Talisman Island - 1st Edition - 2nd Edition

Ah yes, I also seem to have a few coloured adventure cards... but maybe they are from a later edition? 2nd probably... Having said that, my 1st edition will always be my favourite version of Talisman even if the 4th edition is in actual fact more spectacular.