The FAQ for Talisman is now posted...

www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/Talisman/support/talisman-faq1-0.pdf

Does anyone disagree, logically, with the question about the Cursed Glade and Desert spaces?

If you haven't read it, it says, basically, that if you encounter a character on the Cursed Glade or Desert spaces, then the effects of the space don't apply.

Come on - if you attack someone in a desert, you're going to get really hot, then get really thirsty, and then die. In that order.

MegaDestroyo said:

Before disagreeing on something, I dare utter the words "Alas, thank you FFG"!

Now I'm gonna read everything through.

* gets popcorn and comfy chair *

"Q2: If the Prophetess chooses to replace a faceup Adventure
Card, can she use the Orb of Knowledge to replace the new
card that she draws?

A: Yes." (p. 2)

When did she gain that ability?

Destroy Magic got nerfed, sniff .

Monk can double up on ability + Psionic Blast it seems. Similarly, looks like duplication is back in (Fiend Slayer + Prophesy later on)

"Teleport
Q: If the Teleport Spell is cast and another character casts
Counterspell to negate its effect, can the character then roll
a die for his movement instead?

A: Yes." (p. 3)

This got changed as well. IIRC, it was that you couldn't roll.

Looks like Sage (and by extension Warlock) got a boost, starting their turns with 0 Spells, but still allowed to cast the Spell they get.

"Q6: Can the Grim Reaper enter the Dungeon?

A: Yes. The Grim Reaper may enter and leave the Dungeon
Region according to the normal rules for a character
entering and leaving the Dungeon, with the following
exception: When the Grim Reaper reaches the Treasure
Chamber space, he must immediately move to any space in
any Region (except the Inner Region) and end his movement
in that space. The player who moved the Grim Reaper
chooses which space he is moved to." (p. 4)

Assuming "any space" means any space listed on the Treasure Chamber space and not literally any space?

I've read everything, and practically I don't see any mistakes. I noticed few things, like impossible as for now actions (Ghost card and next below), really idiotic question about encountering drawn space card and I'm pretty disagreeing with Minstrel card however as for the rest cards, the rest of answers are that ones I expected. So nihil novi sub sole...

Also, does the Orb of Knowledge bit mean Prophetess can use it normally, on top of her ability?

Draw 1, don't like it, discard, draw 1, don't like it, draw 1, have to keep it (unless she has Alteration to boot).

Dam said:

Yes. I just receive that answer from Jon

Good thing there is just 1 Orb of Knowledge in 288 cards, at least she won't get it automatically every game. Of course, Prophetess + Orb + Fiend Slayer + Prophecy is back on! Hit the Hidden Valley for draw 5, then possibly replace two of them.

Thinking about the Reaper, sounds like it really does mean "any space", but that he can no longer enter-exit the Treasure Chamber from the spaces that are "connected" to it, as was previously ruled. So Dungeon becomes, if the Reaper has to hike the long way from the Dungeon Entrance to the Treasure Chamber. If you want the Reaper out of the picture, just send him in there and keep around the middle of the Dungeon board.

Counterspell
Q1: Can a character cast Counterspell on one of his own
Spells to negate its effects?
A: Yes.

Nullify

Q1: Can a character cast the Nullify Spell on himself?
A: Yes, as long as you have at least one Spell at the time
that Nullify is cast.

These two were surprises for me. I still believed that playing with Spells was prohibited in a fantasy world.

Reflection
Q: Can a character cast the Reflection Spell to negate the
effects of an Immobility Spell?
A: Yes.

Ok, but this FAQ doesn't clarify all possible issues of Reflection. Most notably, it doesn't say it's not a Counterspell that reflects the Spell on the caster if it's possible.

Q3: Can the Prophetess look at the Genie’s Spells?
A: No.

I probably missed this one. Interesting. I suppose it's the same with the Spell Ring.

Q: Can the Tinker Imp discard a random Object that is
inside the Bag of Holding or the Concealed Pouch?
A: Yes

So when you draw this nasty fellow and you have Bag/Pouch, you mix the Objects together and draw a random one. If it happens to be the Bag, Objects inside are blown away with the Bag; if it is the Pouch, you only lose the Pouch (as per Shatter Spell FAQ); Objects inside the Bag/Pouch can be randomly chosen as well (better than to lose the Bag, of course).

Regarding the Prophetess stacking with the Orb, I don't think you can simply draw a card, discard, draw a card, discard, draw a card and encounter. Remember how Prophetess ability (and Orb) is written:

"Whenever you have to draw AC, you may discard one card of your choice that you do not wish to encounter and draw one more card to replace it, which you must encounter".

I don't think the Orb allows the Prophetess to ignore that "must"; it only works when she draws multiple cards. If she draws two or more, she may draw all of them and choose up to two to discard and replace with two other cards, which she must encounter.

Unfortunately that important FAQ has a typing error (copy and paste from the previous one) and doesn't really clarify anything.

For the rest, I'm very happy to have my beloved "duplication" back again! This will surely benefit the Monk (of course he can also the Warhorse bonus too).

I'm agree that this FAQ does not clarify many thing such as what happen, when a summoned creature is fighting against a Character with Golden Statue. If that Character is losing a life (should) or Golden Statue. I found few useless questions but I didn't found some more important. Of course I know, that "important question" depends of the taste..

The_Warlock said:

The Philosopher has also the word Must in his ability, and he can still use the Orb of Knowledge, to replace the card that he drew, for discarding a adventure card on the space..

So the Prophetess can do the same.

And Jon said the same to me, that you can combine them together now.

I've read through it, and many of the questions could have been figured out with some common sense.  Then there are others that I know our group with never use because they are utter nonsense where game mechanics are being rigged or tweaked to ignore the game environment.  An example of this is the ruling on Cursed Glade...

"The instructions on the Cursed Glade only affect a character encountering the space. This also applies to the Desert spaces...."

Ummm... okay, so I land on a Desert while another adventurer is there... and in choosing to encounter the other adventurer I don't lose a Life because I didn't draw a card?  I don't think so.  So anyone landing there and potentially losing a life better watch their back, because if some else lands there, they can avoid losing a life by attacking you.  Ludicrous.

"Note that the Valley of Fire requires a character to have a Talisman before he lands on the space. Even if a character encounters another character on the Valley of Fire, he must still have a Talisman to enter the space."

What has that got to do with anything? That's dealing with prerequisites required before one can land on the space and encounter it or anyone else there.  And it's based on a card and not the space itself.  The question was related to effects that occur after one has already arrived on the space.  And you can't even step onto the Valley of Fire without a Talisman, so the comparison doesnt' work.

So, when I step on the Cursed Glade, I'm not really on the Cursed Glade if I try to wack somebody.  If that so, then no one should be able to affect me with any spell that targets a region or space... because I'm not there.

House Rule: If you are on a space, you are affected by the space; that is not the same as encountering what it offers. It's influence is aside from drawing a card or dealing with persona's there or encountering another character. It's been that way since the founding of Talisman as far as I know or remember.

 "Q2: If a character rolls a “5” in the Tavern, he may choose to teleport to any other space in the Outer Region as his next move. If the character has to miss his next turn, can he still teleport when he next has a move?   A: Yes."

Ah, so a Teleport isn't an actual move, though when used as a Spell, it has to be used in place of a movement. And if the adventurer missed the "next" turn, where's the wizard that offered the Teleport on the next turn... just sitting around and waiting?  Balderdash!

Assassin.... we already nixed those loopholes long ago in the opposite of what is listed.  These excessive uses of Assassination have been long standing problem with that character. And it should have fixed the other way.

Not worth going on with the rest.  Some of this stuff is very disappointing.

MegaDestroyo said:

The lack of logic in Talisman has never bothered me as long as it leads to fun. The cool thing is that you can attack people in the desert and not get screwed yourself. If you wanted to attack some one in the desert with the other rules you''re risking 2 lives.

JCHendee said:

So the logical rule would be that any character landing on the desert loses a life even if he encounters a character there. Right, glad that's settled then. But what if the blizzard event is drawn? Surely a blizzard would not appear in the middle of an arid desert. So in that case you must discard the blizzard and draw another card.

But what if the blizzard was drawn on a different space? The blizzard affects all characters but surely it would not appear in the desert because that would be ludicrous. In this case characters in the desert must roll for movement normally and are not affected by the blizzard but all of the other characters not in deserts remain affected.

But what if you draw the magic stream? Surely it would be ludicrous to have a stream appear in the middle of a desert even if it is magical. In that case you must draw another card.

But what if you draw the giant ice elemental? If a blizzard does not affect the desert surely an ice elemental could not exist in the space otherwise that would be ludicrous.

I think you see where I'm going with this. As soon as you make one rules change where does it end? Talisman is famous for its warped logic. How many other games turn people into little toad miniatures for crying out loud? If you are that worried about logic, balance and verisimilitude wouldn't it be easier to just move on to a different game? HarnWorld is an emersive game experience built upon a solid foundation of old myth and legends. The rules are fairly simple but rich enough to simulate realism and yes, even plenty of verisimilitude. The alignment system is detailed and gives players real choices on how to play their characters. So please switch to a game you actually love and stop obsessing about trying to find every detail that's wrong with Talisman.

Thank you!

Carrion Prince said:

I know... and it doesn't make sense, though I have seen snow fall in a desert. (No, it wasn't a blizzard.)  I think there are a lot of silly things that can happen in Talisman.  The difference is that when there's obvious instructions written out that have been interpreted one way for two decades you don't over rule them just so players can use all of their toys on each other.  If two adventurers who are leaning on magical gadgets want to duke it out in the Cursed Glade... well, stupid is as stupid does... and deserves to suffer for it. Drawing a nonsensical event isn't that same thing.

Carrion Prince said:

No you wouldn't. If we're playing the reality game, there are rivers... large ones... that run under many of our world's deserts.  And occasionally the are tapped or breach the surface on their own.  As to the magical part, well, I'm not going to go there since the "magic" excuse has been abused for all sorts of loopholes in Talisman. I could but I restrain myself.

Carrion Prince said:

Elementals don't exist naturally... and someone or something had to bring one there.  That's akin to the old "it's magic" excuse, but not quite.

Carrion Prince said:

And I could say exactly the same thing about half a dozen rulings in the FAQ.... where is it going to end?  Will it still be Talisman... or a videogame masquerading as a boardgame, where its all about what the "code" lets you get away with?  That's not the Talisman I've known for twenty years.  That's not the "magical quest."

And while we're at it... do you think someone landing on the Desert should avoid losing a life because they attack another adventurer rather than draw a card?  Come on now!  If you're willing to concede that's too far, then tell me how the Cursed Glade ruling should be thought any less scoffable.

Expanding examples to ridiculous proportions doesn't negate the specific instance as being ridiculous itself.