Hey devs! What was your intention to release the Witch Hunter?

[Legolas]

I know that the game is not intended to be balanced, but comon! Whats the point to start a game and being killed by the Witch Hunter in 2 turns? Thats really ridicoulus and i really hope that it will be fixed somehow. For example by removing his 'witch hunter token' ability.
It feels like he was created by someone who never played that game and/or has no idea about it.

[Arcadian]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Connery:

BH the Goat fellas....

Can you explain that to people who don't speak leet?

I didn't have a problem with it either, but only because I've only played against it once and then he didn't target me. But I feel sorry for the guy he harassed. It's about the potential, and just because you never had a problem with it doesn't mean it's not OP.

[Crash [LV]]

in line with general fantasy concepts.

Some of those concepts might be younger than this game. Talisman boardgame is quite old, 1st ed. release was in 1984.

[RJJameson]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Crash LV:

in line with general fantasy concepts.

Some of those concepts might be younger than this game. Talisman boardgame is quite old, 1st ed. release was in 1984.

I think it more likely that if the original Talisman had both a Warlock and a Wizard together, it would have made the Warlock Evil and the Wizard Neutral. But since it only had a wizard (and no guarantee of anything more coming along), he was made evil as 'permissible' by the tropes--wizards are still frequently evil when there are only one or two 'types' of magic users in a story. The Warlock came along after the game was successful, along with tons of other new characters, and introduced some dissonance with 'the tropes.'

Not that Talisman needs to be bound by the tropes. The devs are free to do what they'd like. :)


If you'll pardon a bit of off-topic monologuing on a topic of special interest to me, 1984 is not actually that old, in fantasy genre terms. The Lord of the Rings was published 1954-1955. D&D was created in 1974, with its first novelization in 1979. The original D&D popularized a number of tropes, but was also the product of a great many of them, drawing from the (nowadays) more obscure, but rich fantasy history between 1920-1970. The Fantasy big bang happened shortly afterwards, in 1977. It was a trio of massively successful fantasy books which launched the genre into the mainstream and which included the first blatant and successful clone of Tolkien (The Sword of Shannara). After that, publishers were clamoring for books from a genre they had been largely trying to ignore (Tolkien's success being a one-off that most publishers weren't interested in trying to replicate).

By the time the first Dragonlance book came out in 1984--the same year as this game--there was enough popular awareness of the Tolkien/D&D cliches to recognize their presence within its pages.

It is worth noting that Avalon Hill's game Magic Realm (1979) had a 'neutral' wizard. There was no Warlock, but the Sorcerer, Witch, and Witch King were all evil, and in actual language, a Warlock is the male counterpart of the witch. While one has 'good' witches in fantasy, this again tends to be in stories where there are only one or two magic user 'types.'

[Tom Longshaw-Young]

Nobody can have sleeves as long as the Wizard does and not be evil, that's my totally ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ stance on the subject.

[MNMNMMMNMNM]

Great insight, RJJameson! :)
I absolutely love how talisman manages to coherently incorporate themes, motifs, narratives from very different backgrounds. I hear there was even some sort of sci-fi-expansion in one edition, concerned with the dimension of time, or something like that. I'd like to see that done digitally, too.

And btw, let's not forget that furthermore, I consider that Carth... - eh - the witch hunter needs a massive nerf!

[Legolas]

I think that its not allowed for the devs to change anything about the non digital stuff and thats why i didnt mention anything about other chars.... the list would be long :)

There are a lot of OP chars but thats not even a big issue compared to the Witch Hunter. Being able to kill someone in the first 2 turns is a NO-GO!

[Wokal]

I totally agree that the witch hunter needs to be nerfed!
Its frustrating and not fun at all - maybe only for the one who picked the witch hunter or with someone who doesnt know how to play the game yet.

And yeah its correct - nobody picks achron or the spectre collector. Small improvements could make them playable!

Thanks for your hard work Tom!

[Arcadian]

Regarding the spectre collector, isn't his clothing a bit on the modern side? It looks like he's wearing black jeans and designer shoes. Something about his art just feels off. Same thing with the Witch Doctor. He's even wearing something that looks like a tribal tuxedo.

The artist behind the Saracen and characters in the same style also isn't very good, sorry. A lot of the expansion characters has lower quality art than the old ones, while others like the Dervish and Spider Queen are really good. That's not just my subjective opinion. Anyone who has an eye for art can see it. Please hire a better artist who can draw high fantasy characters.

I know the game is leaning towards steam-punk with some expansions, but the steam-punk characters like the inventor have an appropriately themed look and aren't trying to be modern in any way.

[Arcadian]

Diposting pertama kali oleh RJJameson:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Crash LV:

Some of those concepts might be younger than this game. Talisman boardgame is quite old, 1st ed. release was in 1984.

I think it more likely that if the original Talisman had both a Warlock and a Wizard together, it would have made the Warlock Evil and the Wizard Neutral. But since it only had a wizard (and no guarantee of anything more coming along), he was made evil as 'permissible' by the tropes--wizards are still frequently evil when there are only one or two 'types' of magic users in a story. The Warlock came along after the game was successful, along with tons of other new characters, and introduced some dissonance with 'the tropes.'

Not that Talisman needs to be bound by the tropes. The devs are free to do what they'd like. :)


If you'll pardon a bit of off-topic monologuing on a topic of special interest to me, 1984 is not actually that old, in fantasy genre terms. The Lord of the Rings was published 1954-1955. D&D was created in 1974, with its first novelization in 1979. The original D&D popularized a number of tropes, but was also the product of a great many of them, drawing from the (nowadays) more obscure, but rich fantasy history between 1920-1970. The Fantasy big bang happened shortly afterwards, in 1977. It was a trio of massively successful fantasy books which launched the genre into the mainstream and which included the first blatant and successful clone of Tolkien (The Sword of Shannara). After that, publishers were clamoring for books from a genre they had been largely trying to ignore (Tolkien's success being a one-off that most publishers weren't interested in trying to replicate).

By the time the first Dragonlance book came out in 1984--the same year as this game--there was enough popular awareness of the Tolkien/D&D cliches to recognize their presence within its pages.

It is worth noting that Avalon Hill's game Magic Realm (1979) had a 'neutral' wizard. There was no Warlock, but the Sorcerer, Witch, and Witch King were all evil, and in actual language, a Warlock is the male counterpart of the witch. While one has 'good' witches in fantasy, this again tends to be in stories where there are only one or two magic user 'types.'

Exactly my point. Most fantasy games today have warlock as the evil or evil themed magic-user, so people are used to that, while most wizards are good or neutral (Gandalf, Jaina, Elminster) But they had their reason for making the wizard evil I guess. It's not really important in a game play perspective though. It's just a flavour thing.