In the Balance, “BETA” 1
Adventure Cards, 3/16/2009

BETA VERSION NOTES

The previous Alpha release archive has been removed and is no longer available for download. This Beta release includes all previous cards from the Alpha release, plus new ones, but is not the complete 104 Adventure cards yet. Most previous cards have been revised (with exceptions, such as Place-Challenge cards which need conversion to the method used for the Dry Spring). Feel free to skip previously reviewed cards, if you prefer, and concentrate on the new ones.

Documentation is not included this time, as I have not had time to expand or update it. In addition, I would appreciate it if people kept an eye out for typos, as I've been working on these in fast spare moments as well as early in the mornings and late at night.

All feedback and suggestions are once again welcome. Please place them in this new topic and not the old topic for the Alpha release.

ONCE AGAIN... this release is for FFG forum members only. Please do not distribute the file or link elsewhere.

The file may be downloaded HERE (11.1 mb).

For those interested in the theory and analysis that led to the development of these cards and used as a ongoing guide for all my expansion work, see my log link in the signature of all of my posts. Look for log posts under the heading of "Balancing the Talisman."

Cool I'll take a look when I get a chance.

I have take already a look, so be prepared for a lot of questions. I am not finish yet

JC,

First i want to say that you have done a good job ! I like most of your cards very much.

Oke, here they come !

Dracosapiens

it says he has 2 lives. Does this mean that you must only place one aditional life on the card. Otherwise he has actually 3 lifes

Rogues

Pointes must be changed to points.

If you are defeated by the rogue and you must choose to lose one gold or life and you lose with a difference by 3+ points. Does this mean that you must also lose a object or magic object?

I miss the word also. otherwise you don't lose a life if the difference is 3 points or higher.

Shade

I miss the word your. The card must say. You revert to your starting craft

Gang of Gators( i like this card)

I like it better if you change the strength 2 to strength 3

I would add that if you lose the battle, they will eat one follower at random.

This makes the card interesting and a little dangerous

Ps: how many points are they worth for a trophie? 2 i presume?

Furry Bandits

Who must roll a 1 so that you lose? The bandits or the character? I presume the bandits? It makes more sense if the bandits must roll a 1 to steal something from the character.

Otherwise they are more dificult to beat.

Are the Furry bandits 1 strength tropie worth

Fair Skies

To explain the card better, it must say:

For one round, all adventures who roll 1D6 for movement may move 1 extra space etc

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

More are coming. i am going to eat now.

Velhart said:

This type of card is based on several that have popped up on previous 2nd and 3rd expansions. Lives are always dealt with the same as for Characters when an Enemy is given the attribute of Lives. So no, he does not actually have three; Enemies with Lives listed do not actually have Lives. (Life was always a poorly chosen term for Characters.)

Velhart said:

Got it... more clarity needed. The loss of an Object (which I may change to be specifically "Weapon") is in addition to lost life or gold.

Velhart said:

Got it.

Velhart said:

Strength 3 would be more like a Croc, not an alligator. Men can and have wrestled alligators, but not many have dared try a crocodile (average for Strength among adventurers is 2.6) I had thought of the followers option, but I already have "Monsters" that do that and a fair number of Events that do so as well. I wanted to keep the special effects about Animals to a minimum.

Velhart said:

Again, the multi-Enemy is an old trick found in 2nd and 3rd edition Enemies. If an Enemy card has multiple fights, that's multiple opponents, thereby multiple trophies... always. (Strength x Count = Total Trophy Points)

Velhart said:

Another Multi-Enemy, Multi-Fight card, so same rules as for Gang of Gators and all such cards. The original rationale (guessing) for this type of card was to provide a way for characters to get a quick bump in one Strength point early in the game. But do so in the DOING instead of another endless gimme and freebie through Events and Strangers. Problem was, it didn't always come up soon enough. Over half the time it was drawn when the character didn't even have to roll to beat each one.

If the adventurer rolls 1, s/he loses automatically (in this case meaning loses a gold or listed object, not a life). And yes, they will be hard to beat (sans a Fate); this emulates a meerkat's superior speed and agility, despite its small size and little to no Strength. My expanion is somewhat rigged for a few startling and high changes in wealth... so something has to balance that here and there. You'll notice these little guys don't / can't steal anything large. And I like the idea of little things that make some big thumper utterly frustrated with.

ASIDE: I have dealt with full grown meerkats (& babies) in my youth. A friend had a mother who was a vet for the Seattle zoo. Those little guys make a ferret seem like no trouble at all. They seem more sedate at first, but they fixate on things unlike a ferret's wandering attention. One got obsessed with a shiny silver snuffbox inside a locked display casement... had to pull him off it a dozen times in an hour. Next day, the 8 pound theif was gone and so wat the snuff box. Somehow, he managed to knock over and shatter that 6 foot tall display casement. They found him of course, back in his room, but they never found that snuff box... it was the only thing missing from the display.

Velhart said:

I see you point.... though it may need even more tweaking to to cover certain other rolled movements verses automatic ones.

I've read through the Beta stuff and I must say that I like pretty much all the new cards. Some even made me stop and go "That's Cool!".

I will give you a full review when I get a chance.

Keep it up!

Hi Jc

I see that you changed the text from the verdant zealot.

Does she also run off if a neutral character attacks you? then i encounter that character too ...

------

Ps: Are you making a crocodile too then?

Or are you doing it with one alligator card;)

---------

More questions coming tomorrow !

Velhart said:

Any "encounter" at all... She won't care who attacks who. But... I'm not sure how to word that without making it more wordy.

Velhart said:

Hadn't actually thought about it. For now, I'm just trying to fill out a balanced roster of each Enemy subtype, and new and interesting Animal types are a bit troublesome (so are spirits). Still have a few slots left, so who knows. A float (the official term for a group of crocodiles) would most certainly ****** a snack of followers! Hmmm... wonder if they'd even finish off an adventurer in one encounter?

JCHendee said:

A float of crocodiles are coming aaaah run for your lives They are certainly hungry...

What about ants, giants frogs, or a swamp. I know we have a marsh, but it feels like a real adventure. HELP... someone is sinking lol roll a die to see who sinks in the swamp etc

Velhart said:

I had thought about some of the legendary "giant" animals of Celtic and Norse mythos, but they qualify more as "Monsters." And I'm not sure about ants (such as army ants), since you can't fight them... just run away.

The swamp's a nice idea (as an obstacle), and I have a suitable grapic for it, but with only two character attributes, we already have a card of that type for both Strength and Craft (though they're just a plain minimum attribute miss a turn arrangement... rather boring.) Any suggestions, since I intend to put in less Gold cards (since my other currency cards are worth more on average) and add more Challenge (and possibly Obstacle) style Place cards.

Here we go again,

Verdant Pool

Maybe you must add that if spells don't work because of it'd text, then you are lucky, or something like that.

Duchness&duke

Does the card mean that instead of visiting one of the three choices in the city or village, you may heal 1 life?

So if you have both the duke and duchness, then you heal 2 lives right?

Spriggan

Maybe that you must add to the card that: You need not to roll the die in the crags, unless you wish too. If you choose to roll, you must accept the result.

Then you can decide for yourself if you want to enter the crags.

Thorn Witch

Nice card. It's difficult to get rid of her, Cursed glade is your best chance

Verdant Priest

I don't understand the begin text. Maybe you must change it a little..

So you are always safe in the forest. So you may not roll a die there. Maybe it is a penalty for having her. A neutral character can pray there then and ignore the forest text. nice choice

She has also a nice ability for the cursed glade.

Falchion

weild must be changed to wield..

I think that the weapon is too good for a object. ( it's better than a normal sword

Spear

again, weild=wield.

Can you have a shield in your possesion?. But you may not use it if you use the spear in combat?

Flood Plain( nice card)

I think you must make one exception. If you draw the card, and if you can't move further, then you don't have to do what the text says.

Only if you want to move further, then you must roll a die.

Otherwise you are rolling a die and lose followers for nothing, because you can't even walk further..

River landing

I think you must changed it to:

You may pay 1 gold if you land here, and on your next turn, you move directly to a space at the other side.

Arcanist

I think you must skip the third option.

It's too cheap and you will choose always for the third option instead of the other two.

The first two option are good enough in my eyes. It's a fair trade.

Savant

I like it better if you must dicard the savant if you reach your destination. And then you get a talisman card.

Maybe that you can also add that no other player can reach that location without a savant.

Skinner Post

Does the card stay on the place?

if i am right..they are not many animal followers in the game.. so i don't really like this option.

It let me think about the minstrel. He sells his followers, and others can buy them there..( if the minstrel is in the game..

Velhart said:

Do you mean counterspells to stop the spell? There's few of those, so might as well leave them effective. And the Nature is casting the spell, not the character, so it wouldn't mater if the character doesn't have the Craft for a spell.

Velhart said:

Yes, and yes.

Velhart said:

Okay.

Velhart said:

I'll try to make the opening text a little more literal. Essentially she will not join any kind of theurgical / religious character of Good or Evil. The number and poorly described variations are two many to reiterate: Priest, Monk, Holy Warrior, Cultist, etc., etc., etc... Sometimes standard characters are very poorly worded as to whether they are magic or religious oriented.

Velhart said:

I'll get that typo. Also, remember that the average Strength of the standard characters is 2.6... so the extra bonus isn't going to work of most. Even fewer when one considers expansion and fan characters. Only a character with Strength 1 or 2 will get the lift to Strength 3 in Battle. Falchions (by other names and variations) are a stock weapon of many medieval cultures... and for good reason. They require little skill to learn, aren't a very skillful weapon, but have better impact when swung. It will be the only one in the whole expansion, so when mixed with the standard deck that's 1 card out of 208; I will not be including this object or the Mace among Purchase cards.

Velhart said:

Possession doesn't mean using it, so yes you can have Shield. The +2 is only applicable when you don't "use" a shield because your weilding the spear with both hands (to strike effectively at a bigger, tougher target). I may need to do some more re-wording on this to make it appropriate (NOTE: the Holy Lance was very generically written in bad ways that ignore what a Lance really is.... usually requiring one to be on horseback.)

Velhart said:

Interesting point, and I'll have to consider it more carefully... and apply the same consideration to the Old Battlements.

Velhart said:

Nope, that's not exactly what it means for where you can go... so I'll reconsider some of its description (you only get to go to either outer corner square to either side of the landing.)

Velhart said:

Okay, sounds reasonable.

Velhart said:

The problem is that when the expansion is added to the standard deck, the ration of Talismans as Adventure cards is cut in half. The Savant balances that ration decrease with one card that can become a Talisman but isn't one straight off.

Velhart said:

Nope... that turns the Savant into a Follower instead of Stranger. Then as a Follower he is only temporary, which isn't how Followers work.

Velhart said:

You're forgetting about Mules, Horses, Horse and Cart, my new Camel (and later a Pacaderm). Then there are traditional followers as Animals in my expansion as well... and in others. Plenty to do business with Skinner. And yes, any character that can take and Enemy as a Follower is something I will need to think about for that card... though once out of that character's hands, it isn't a Follower anymore.

Verdant Pool

I mean, that if you draw a spell card, and the spell card says that you must use it on the start of the turn, the verdant pool can't cast it on you.... right?

So.. this means that it don't work right?

River landing

It does not say either outer corner space..

So this means that you can get to the city, tavern, village or chapel. depending on wich side of the board you are standing..?

So you can always choose one of the 2 sides.. ( chapel city or chapel village etc.

Savant

So the savant will stay on his place.

So how does this work?

One player visits him after the savant made his home on the space. He rolls a dice and knows a talisman location.

In my eyes, a other player does not know where the location is. Must he visit the savant too?

Skinner

oke i understand. I have not thought about that, because they where followers, but i understand your point.

Velhart said:

Read the Verdant Pool again... word by word. What's on the Spell does not override the instructions given on another card. Spell casting Adventure cards are another old trick from 2nd edition days.

Velhart said:

YES! It depends on which Fields is closest to the person who drew the Landing... and that's where the landing stays the rest of the game. So where it leads to will be different each game. And there are Fields spaces on all FOUR sides of the board, so any game could have access to one of FOUR different combinations of two corner spaces.

Velhart said:

Yes.

Velhart said:

No, the roll is done out in the open... the first player is just the one who activates him... then its free-for-all time depending on which space he calls out as the "finish line." First one there takes the Savant off the board and uses that card as if it were a Talisman.

Savant is still an experiment. The number of Talismans never changes irregardless of players, which is okay. But it is different when the chance of a Talisman being drawen is altered irregardless of number of players. Too few expansion designers are not paying attention to this.

Example: there are 4 Talismans in the standard 104 card deck. If I added no new ones at all, when my expansion is inserted, that would 4 per 208 cards. As much as I don't like too many freebies (and Talisman is LOADED with them), that's too low a ratio. In a game with few players, it's possible no free Talismans might be drawn at all. In avoiding more freebies, I put a little bit of an open challenge (and hopefully some fuch competition) in a race to a card that can ultimately be used as a new "form" of Talisman. I may have some other notions as well.

Maybe it won't work, but I'm going to give it a try.

JCHendee said:

Verdant Pool

So a player ignore the text when you can cast it, even if the spell says at the start of his turn.Make sense somehow. It means only when you can cast the spell.. mmm

what about storm crow,summon bear alteration, resurection, counterspell,fireball, acquisition and many others.

They are spells that won't work..

River landing.

I understand what you mean.

You must only write the word outer in the text space. The card does not say what you actually mean with this card.

So it must say:

and on your next turn move directly to either outer corner space on the same side of the board as the landing

Savant

Maybe you must say that the savant made his home there where he lands on the board( after rolling the die where he lands) or something.

Otherwise i( or other people maybe) thinks that you can pick up the savant. And maybe you can also add that other players knows this location too after the first player roll the die for that location.

---------

I hope you appreciated my thoughts about the cards that you made. I like most of your cards, so i take my time where clarify is needed

Greetz

~Velhart~

One creature came up in my mind..

What about a Lamia

-------

Velhart said:

Yes, some interpretation is required... and perhaps an additional note might be needed. In general, if the spell isn't applicable, then nothing happens. You might just as easily pull a Healing spell among others.

Velhart said:

The card says to place in the nearest fields of the "outer region"... so you can't really get to any corner except the Outer Region. But I'll try to see if something more can be fit on the text... but it is at a point where too much explicit wording is getting too wordy. There are already standard rules for how to "cross" the river to the Middle Region, and nothing on the Landing offer any explicit chance to counter those. You're assuming too much that isn't on the card.

Velhart said:

Here's the text since the last recent edit: "Place on the nearest "Fields" in the Outer Region. You may pay 1 Gold if you land here, and on your next turn move directly to either corner space nearest the Landing. The boatman won't transport large Animals (Mules, Horses, etc.) nor Enemy "Monsters," "Dragons" or "Spirits" as Followers"

If the Landing is place in the Outer Region... the "nearest corners" can't possibly be in the Middle Region. And those corners will be different depending on which of the FOUR sides of the Outer Region it is placed on. (There is a Field space on all four sides of the Outer Regions; there are no Fields spaces in the Middle Region.)

Velhart said:

You're interpreting the last step out of order for the order of instructions on the card.

1. "Roll a die and move him clockwise." So he doesn't start on your space and the roll automatically sets his own space. He is not setting up home because unlike other Strangers that state such, his follow instructions indicate he isn't playing to stay there.
2. "First to reach him..." ... so not automatically you... "rolls to reveal a Talisman's location." [Table of rolls not included here.] So now you have some place to get to (where he isn't) before anyone else gets there.
3. "First to reach that location..." so not automatically you, then "takes the Savant as a Talisman."

The Savant is only take when someone reaches the location he indicated.

Velhart said:

ALWAYS!!! If I seem cranky... it's not you... its relatives in town. You know... smile, best behavior, be treated like you 18 again, people telling tales about your from 10, 20, 30 years ago... which have been told, 10, 20, 30 times a year (or in the same week's visit!)... SIGH. And about half way through the week you're praying for nuclear strike with your own house at ground zero! Bear with me... its not you... its me.

But in this card, you may have lumped too many things together all at once. This is a more task based card where instructions are handled one at a time as steps to complete implied by the order of the instructions. And admittedly, it's hard to get it clear with as few words as possible. It's a bit of a departure from standard Adventure cards, which are pretty much are just (1) get a freebie, (2) lose a freebie, (3) visit something, or (4) kill something ... That gets pretty dull after 5... 10... 20 years.

The Savant is the only card in the Expansion that's "task" oriented. I have some notions for others later on in another modular expansion call "Tasks & Tales" that I'll get to someday. Need to finish all of the deck expansions for In the Balance first, which includes other new "types" or new takes on old cards as experiments. Obviously the "Place - Obstacle" and "Place - Challenge" are some of the other ones, which were also ones that need several re-edits for problems... and I'm still not fully sure about them.

JCHendee said:

River Landing

You are absolute right about this card

But the idea is new for talisman. I think the whole time that you can cross the river from the fields in the outer region to a corner space in the middle region at the same side of the board. you could think that if you read the card..

But i know what you mean now

Savant

i understand what you mean. But it's a little tricky to understand that the Savant stays on the place until someone find the talisman.

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

The same goes aply for Arcanist or Skinner Post.

I think the whole time that you can take the Arcanist with you, but i am not sure about that anymore.

It does not say that he makes his home there. The same aply for Skinner Post..

This is why clarify is needed. If you look to the official talisman cards, then you see it by the Witch card, etc

Okay, I'll try to look at some of those Stranger and Place cards, and where possible add a "shop" or "home" designation.

I'm not sure what to do about the Landing... I'll try looking at the wording again and see what's possible.

One question about the Thorn Witch

it says that you can get rid of her if you visit also the Verdant Priest. But if a other player her her, does this mean that if you land on that player, you can then discard the thorn witch?( or Must you encounter that player for that.

If you have the verdant priest yourself. What happens then. Can you discard the thorn witch right away..

Originally, I did mention on that card that "encountering" a player with the Verdant Priest is what its about... it got very wordy. And yes, if your have the Verdant Priest you can send the Thorn Witch one her way (discard) immediately... or if you pick her up after you have the Thorn Witch. Again, there just wasn't room to say so on the card, and I mearly had to hope people realized that was the case by circumstances (and there are so many circumstances for many cards).

There are many special interactions in this expansion... many having to do with Follows. Much as I hate the thought of it... it may require and in-development FAQ of its own.

I look forward to your re- writings of some cards.

Then i can download them again and take a look at it

Just a quick update to let people know I am still reworking cards based on your notes and some of my own. Just got back from out of town and am currently buried in catching up on Life. I hope to have something new to share by the end of next weekend.

Still running behind in getting the full Adventure deck expansion finished for review. But it is coming, I promise, within a few days. Just trying to work out the documentation roughly so at least people can review it and tell me what they think.

Hurry up then! I am waiting