Posted this on the Geek, but thought I'd get responses from the folks here as well.

We've been trying to come up with elegant solutions for the "rich getting richer" syndrome, and reducing the swingy nature of some fatal PVP encounters.

There are alternative rules in the game that enable the replacement character directly inherit the items of the killed character, but this would kill the incentive of the domineering player to land the crushing blow on near-death opponents.

What we've come up with:

Any character who lands the killing blow on another character may only take one item /follower of his choice or one bag of gold from the "corpse".
The rest of the loot is transported immediately to the killed character's starting location.

Any character who lands on that location may then claim the loot, (provided he wasn't forced to miss or end his turn from encountering the space, losing to an Enemy or due to a spell effect.).

This only accounts for PVP encounters. Any character that was killed in an Enemy encounter or due to a fatal spell, card or board effect, leaves his loot behind on the space where he was killed.

Exception: when playing with the Dragon expansion, regardless of how a character was killed, all his accumulated Dragon scales are inherited by the replacement character.

These rules will help minimize the power gap between the domineering and starting characters.

What are your thoughts on this?

Share your own houserules for remedying these issues.

As an aside, we are thinking of implementing this rule late in the game, when the replacement character has no chance of catching up to the leader.

I think there has been some misinterpretation here. The character landing on the space chooses to encounter the space or another character there. It gets its normal reward for defeating that other character, but if it chooses to kill the character, that is all it gets. The stuff left behind becomes part of a "space" encounter. That other character must somehow re-encounter the space later to touch any of that stuff… including any gold left behind.

It is just as nonsensical as many mechanics in this game, but this is the way we play it. It accomplishes the same thing as what you are after by interpreting the rules by the letter.

If you defeat another character and force him to lose his last life, you may claim all of his possessions. Any items not claimed are then placed faceup on the space!

Ell.

I guess this should be in Home Brews.

talismanamsilat said:

Yes, and though it makes prefect sense… it is contradictory by the sense of some of the other rules. Then again, I'm not really into rules lawyering as much as making the game fun for all involved by the way individual groups want to play it. What I suggest, though nonsensical, is a much simpler way to solve the OP stated problem. If you want to kill off another character, so be it, and then that's your big gain. If you want their stuff, defeat them and take a reward from them by the other rules… not both. Simple.

It's a tough question. We've all had situations where a character is killed, and the player starts over as a new character. Depending on the stage of the game, the new player may have no chance whatsoever of ever catching up to the leader, which clearly impacts the fun factor for that player.

I do sympathize - been there myself. It can be a drag, going through the motions knowing you have no real chance of victory.

But their character was defeated, and forced out of the game. In many other games, that would be it - you lost, now go away.

Talisman offers a second chance (or third, fourth, etc) for those who wish to continue playing, and strive for victory even though the odds may be against them. I understand that it can be tough on the returning player, but that's the price for losing. You re-enter the game hoping the lead character will meet with some misfortune allowing you to regain ground. I have no interest in softening the rules so that players returning with 2nd or 3th characters have a better chance to catch up.

If playing with the Reaper expansion, then having a new character is better than being out as you can always try to roll a 1 on movement so that you can try to send Death after the various players in the lead.

Yea, we always play with the Reaper. It's fun. Although all our games are 2-player sessions, but still, the Grim One has managed to get his share of instant kills.

I think the OP's question was more about hoarding after a kill. That is a separate problem from (thought connected to) a kill. Being knocked out of the game is a big bummer, and certainly with the effort it takes to take someone else out (especially without demigod mechanics like the Reaper), is it acceptable for the one victor to suddenly hoard everything left on that space when in normal combat the choice is between taking a life and taking something else? If there's a limit in normal combat, why isn't there a limit when you have already chosen to take a Life instead of something else? Seems the choice has been made and shouldn't change after the fact simply because a last life is taken. But of course, for those playing officially, that is the case… even if there's a conceptual contradiction in those rules.

Hence we play that the choice has been made. Encountering the other character is the end of the turn. Anything that falls on the space is left there, and even the player re-entering has a chance to get to the pile of goodies. We consider that as well to be better in the balance than any "inheritance" rule. And it works whether using the Reaper or not. It is also simpler.

That's exactly it. Hoarding after a kill just feels wrong in some way, especially if you're already powerful.

Well, we still haven't implemented this rule, just thinking about it as the last couple of sessions have been devoid of mid-game PVP kills.

Though the one you proposed is obviously simpler, but with your rule, the loot will be less accessible to a starting character if the kill occurred in the Middle Region(unless the substitute is one of the few who also starts in that Region, like the Chivalric Knight or the Warlock)

I think nothing is wrong with hoarding after killing a character in 4th edition

You just kill the character and grab as much goodies as you can.

But this rule is different in the third edition version.

If a character is killed, then all objects, followers are put aside the board.

When you begin with a new character, you get the objects, and followers from the previous character.

I think that hoarding after killing a character is just a 4th edition and 2th edition rule?

In third edition, nothing is said about that. You just win the battle or psychic combat vs a character, and you can choose to take one gold or a object.

No extra gains by killing it..