Turn off RNG

[Crabs&Cancer]

Great, I understand this game is about RNG. Terrific. Just a simple question, is there a way to PLEASE turn off the RNG? STR for STR, CRAFT for CRAFT, vendors always give a 6, outcomes are always positive? Please. Judging by the number of threads I've already seen on this topic, it is clear... Make a RNG talisman Edition.. make a NON-RNG Talisman Edition. Please both crowds, not just one... why not? there's already so many options, why not just 1 more option?

[Wock73]

Are you suggesting that the game should be played without dice and cards? Those are the main sources of RNG, without them you might as well call the game something else

[potterman28wxcv]

You do realize that the cards you draw are RNG too ? Everything is rng in that game you can't just turn it off it's part of it. it's as if you said you wanted a Super Mario Bros without jump mechanism

[Fomalhaut]

What number would you like?

[Ragic]

Why do I get the feeling there are bots with ai designed to troll certain forums.

[Hidron]

Buy the actual board game. Then you can play with whatever rules you like.

[arneb_nihal]

Best topic ever.

[Da' Vane]

To be fair, the cards are NOT RNG. The cards may be shuffled into a randomised deck, but this is technically different than RNG, simply because you usually cannot redraw cards until the deck is shuffled, which typically takes place when the deck is exhausted.

It would be possible to create a non-RNG version of Talisman. You simply remove die rolls, and ignore cards that involve die rolls. This would make it more akin to a competitive roleplaying game than a board game.

Out of interest, if you used a purposely stacked deck and removed the die rolls, you would end up with a version that can definitely be solved. Even with a randomised deck, this version of Talisman could be solved, but the amount of calculations needed for all the permutations would be massive...

[Wock73]

Originally posted by Da' Vane:

To be fair, the cards are NOT RNG. The cards may be shuffled into a randomised deck, but this is technically different than RNG, simply because you usually cannot redraw cards until the deck is shuffled, which typically takes place when the deck is exhausted.

It would be possible to create a non-RNG version of Talisman. You simply remove die rolls, and ignore cards that involve die rolls. This would make it more akin to a competitive roleplaying game than a board game.

Out of interest, if you used a purposely stacked deck and removed the die rolls, you would end up with a version that can definitely be solved. Even with a randomised deck, this version of Talisman could be solved, but the amount of calculations needed for all the permutations would be massive...

Okay but.....

Who gets to pick the battleship first, someone picked the top hat before me so I am rage quitting NOW....

Seriously though, RNG is RNG, cards are random and are not a number so technically you are right, but this is clearly splitting hairs

[potterman28wxcv]

How do you randomize the deck ? By using a Random Number Generator where you pick a random card (a card at a random position = a random number between 1 and the length of the deck) and put it on top of a new deck

You repeat that process until the original deck is empty and you get a randomized deck.

That's how deck shuffling works in games, without a RNG you are not able to do that.

A RNG-free talisman would require to not use any randomized deck

[Da' Vane]

It's not so much splitting hairs, as it is differentiating between different forms of random generation, and the impact it has on the game.

The key differences between cards and die rolls are that die rolls are independent events, with a static possibility, where as a deck of cards are not (unless you shuffle the cards back after each draw).

You could have a significantly different game of Talisman if you took 100 cards for the Adventure Deck and then used a percentile dice roll to determine which card is drawn, as you would have a significantly greater chance of repeated results even if you used uniquely different cards.

To provide a simplified example of the difference, imagine using a deck of six cards numbered 1 to 6 compared to a six-sided die. With the die, you have a static chance of any result between 1 and 6, with 1 in 6 chance of each assuming a fair die.

In contrast, the odds of getting a specific result changes depending upon the cards drawn, increasing towards 100% certainty as you draw more cards.

In terms of programming, simulating a die roll is significantly different and much easier than drawing from a deck of cards. If you are only drawing a single card before shuffling, then you can cheat and assume a deck of cards is similar to a die roll, but for multiple draws, the algorithm is significantly different.

Thus, whilst cards involve randomness, they cannot be considered the same as Random Number Generation. There's a very important distinction involved.

From what I can read of the original post, this distinction may be important regarding what is being suggested. So it's slightly more than spitting hairs, unless RNG is merely being used as a short hand for randomness...

[Da' Vane]

Potterman28wxcv, you should also consider WHEN the deck is shuffled, and how it is used afterwards. I hope a made this clear in my reply to Wock73, but from the original post, it could be concluded that the suggestion is to remove RNG during gameplay, not game set up. From what can be read, the request seems to be more about removing die rolls from Talisman.

Interestingly enough, it's not the first time I have come across this suggestion for a diceless version as a house rule for Talisman. It's not extremely popular, however, since the use of dice rolls is a key defining feature within the game. This doesn't make it undoable - just a significantly different experience to play, even more so than cooperative play or solo play variants.

Bear in mind that whilst programmers cheat by using an RNG to create a randomised deck of cards, because nobody is going to spend the time working out the variables in a physically shuffled deck of cards, this still doesn't technically equal RNG. It's the same in the physical version - nobody is going to use an RNG-based system to stack a randomised deck, when they can just shuffle the deck.

[Da' Vane]

Ultimately, I think this comes down to how specific you are being when you use the terms randomness and RNG. Hence the term, technically. In some cases this distinction is important, like not having the Pool of Strength appear more than roughly 1 in 50 cards. Others, not so much.

[DeadlyDanDaMan]

RNG is the entire basis of the game. WIthout it, you don't have a game anymore or virtually ANY replayability. Seriously, what don't people understand about that?

[Da' Vane]

You would still have a game without any randomness, or even just without runtime RNG (aka die rolls). It just won't necessarily be Talisman anymore.

There have been some house rules suggested to go in this direction. Mostly, it's to remove the dice-based elements in various ways. The arguments against such proposals are basically the same as here - it's just not Talisman any more.

It's worth noting that in the physical board game, card-based mechanics aren't necessarily considered the same as dice-based mechanics, despite both being forms of randomness - hence the distinction between the two uses of RNG in some cases.

Out of interest, anyone taken a look at the Talisman RPG by Pegasus Games? Yet another take on the game which, at a first glance, can be considered to be Talisman without cards (and boards).

Getting back to DE, I would recommend that people keep in mind that this is a computer emulation of a physical board game. Both dice-based and card-based systems are emulated using manipulations of the same RNG algorithm within the software itself, even though there are distinctions between these two, and from other forms of randomness in mechanics.

So, yes, Talisman is a mixture of skill and RNG, but not all that RNG is the same. It shouldn't be dismissed as such.

As an aside, the OP might be interested in the fact that the issue might not be with die-based RNG, but with the unreliability of outcomes from a set range with equal outcomes. The same concerns have been raised with games, particularly RPGs with a single die-based mechanic of conflict resolution, like the d20 system behind Dungeons and Dragons.

A response to this often arises in the optional house rule to replace a single die roll (such as a d20) with multiple dice, preferably one with results of a similar range (such as 3d6). The result is a bell-curve of outcomes that see an increased likelihood of middling results, and reduced chances of extreme outcomes.

For Talisman, this can be as simple as swapping a single d6 roll in combat with a 2d6 roll instead. This should create a simple bell curve for combat solving the issue of reliability.

For other d6 die rolls, rolling 2d6 and dividing it by 2 is a quick fix, but would likely neccessitate a reworking of many spaces and cards to take into account the bell curve of these rolls for any sort of true balance. Plus, you would need to decide whether you prefer rounding down or rounding up when halving 2d6.

Ultimately there are options and discussions to be explored here, beyond the initial "It's just not Talisman" rebuttal. After all, No Respawn and Character Selection aren't really "Talisman" either...

[Marik]

Thank you guys for allowing myself my daily laugh.