Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Q2: If the Destroy Magic Spell is in effect, can a character
with a Talisman still enter the Valley of Fire?
A: Yes
that said i think that in reaper game you can pull off the same thing with the shatter spell
Sounds like it's not supposed to happen like that with that spell.
From Page 16 of the Rulebook:
Having and Using Cards
Characters are considered to have anything in their possession, such as Objects, gold, fate, Followers, and Spells.
When a character implements the ability of a card’s text box, he is considered to be using the card. Using cards is optional, and a character may always choose when to use a card he has. For example, the Cross allows a character to automatically destroy Spirits without resorting to psychic combat. The character may choose not to use the Cross and may attack a given Spirit instead.
From the Destroy Magic Spell:
Cast at the start or end of your turn. No character, including yourself, may cast a Spell or use any Magic Object until the start of your next turn.
This proves beyond any shadow of doubt that a player cannot use a Talisman if Destroy Magic is in effect, as he cannot implement the wording on the Talisman Card.
Therefore the player cannot enter the Valley of Fire. Instead he must move back one space towards the Plain of Peril without encountering the space (this is not considered turning back). The Character may continue advancing toward the Crown of Command on his following turn as normal. (Destroy Magic would no longer be in effect and the Talisman may be used by that character.)
Misdirection
Q: Can a character cast the Misdirection Spell on a character in the Inner Region?
A: Yes, but Misdirection may not be cast on a character on the Crown of Command or a character who is turning back. The player who cast Misdirection on a character in the Inner Region can either move his opponent forward to the next space or back one space towards the Plain of Peril.
If the player chooses to move his opponent back one space towards the Plain of Peril, the character does not encounter the space and this is not considered to be turning back. In this case, the character may continue advancing toward the Crown of Command on his following turn as normal.
If the digital version is allowing that spell to interfere with the talisman in that way....the programmer messed up.
Storywise the concept is the same as the usual classical fantasy stories if someone doesnt understand. The Talisman itself isnt actualy magical in any way or maybe it is....but its magic isnt as important as its symbol...it is simply a symbol no less no more....a symbol that is detected by whatever forces are there. Thats why there are mutiple talismans and you can get them many differing ways. Is there a real Talisman....who knows....they could all just be counterfeits created over time. But they all now simply represent the right of the character to be the typical high king or high ruler.
Thus the reason the valley says the character only has to have the talisman.
The real interesting thing is.....in every story that i have read or watched a movie or show about where something like this happens, ie where a person obtains some symbol to prove they have the right to some power item left by some long ago ruler.
It usualy results in tragedy and death.
Thats why i find the alternate crown of command endings so interesting.
If it was truly a valley of flame, then any form of magic protection would easily alow anyone to bypass it. Thus it isnt a valley of flame...thus the reason the character only needs to have the talisman and never needs to use it.
And of course following with that story logic, thus the space clearly states you only need to have it...and in no way shape or form says you have to use it.
Thus the clear distinction between places that say the character must use something or not.
A spell must be cast and most items must be used....but that space and a few other places simply is a check to see if the character has the item or not. Is a character activaley using their alignement to be good or evil or neutral...as a druid yes they are...but on all other characters it is simply a symbol that cannot be actively used.
And Thus it follows the usual fantasy themed genre of the talisman simply being a symbol.
Notice how the Talisman in no way shape or form on its card says it protects the users from flames....if it did then the user could ignore dragon fire or fireballs or anything else. Thus it actualy isnt protecting the user from flames at all.
And when you see those facts you realize its following that typical genre of the character having but a mere symbol or some form of act of faith that is truly the thing allowing them to pass.
Going further with the examples of that in the idiana jones movie with the holy grail they had to make a leap of faith to cross that chasm.
I think the concept sometimes gets used alot....but its interesting inthe dynamics of when such an act happens.
In this game.....at least with the base game....there is no death and tragedy awaiting the character....unless the alternate ending rules are used. But in every single other literature or movie or even televison show....the character is always faced with tragedy. In that last one if you recall idiana jones passes the challenges gets to the grail...ends up getting that one person killed and later the woman not wanting to lose the grail falls into a crevass after it as well.
If they make it they get the stone of power then the other players either have to give up and join the new emporer or get crushed by the emporer and whom ever is on their side.
Like is said its a....sort of used alot genre.
<_<...and now that i think about it....i think they used it it also inthat show Legend of the Seeker......hmm...
Page 2 of the rule book clearly states having it permits the character to enter the area it doesnt say they use it other items say specifically the character uses it it. And the space for the valley of fire clearly says the character simply has to have the a talisman not that he/she uses it.
no disagreement here...just what the board and rule book says.
Also that the talisman in no way shape or form says it protects your character from fire.
but perhaps we disagree on the genre of what this game story is pushing the characters into....i can understand that.
For all we know....the talismans could simply be a compass or map with the valley a maze....or perhaps like i keep saying they are simply a symbol procaliming the character is worthy and nothing more.
First - pure rules/text.
The Valley of Fire space and the Talisman card itself are consistent with each other, in that they both state you have to "have" the Talisman. You don't "use" it.
Which means the Destroy Magic spell -- which says "No[one]... may cast a Spell or _use_ any Magic Object..." -- doesn't prevent the Talisman's effect, because, although it is a Magic Object, you don't "use" it to gain its effect.
Also, the FAQ explicitly states that the Talisman is not affected by Destroy Magic.
It seems pretty clear to me, on this basis, that Destroy Magic does _not_ prevent the Talisman allowing you to enter the Valley of Fire.
The second way to argue is "thematically" - what makes sense given the genre, or "reality" within the game world.
An argument has been made that you should have to "use" the Talisman, despite what the current text says, and for this reason Destroy Magic stops it working for a turn. Another argument is it should work that way "for consistency".
However, I respectfully disagree with these arguments, for a couple of thematic reasons:
1. I'm happy with the concept of the Talisman being "passive". It works because you "have" it, you don't have to "use" it, like you do a spell or a weapon.
2. Even if you do have to "use" it, like any other Magic Object, I'm happy with the Talisman being different because it's the BIG thing. The most magical object of all. The whole point of the game is to get one of these things. I'm totally happy with the concept that the Talisman is, say, too _strong_ to be affected by the Destroy Magic spell. (In the same way that the Amulet can't prevent the Command spell.) (Actually, the Amulet isn't affected by Destroy Magic, either, so there's already a precedent for exceptions...)
However, what I'd really like to see is this concept implemented as a house rule!
If Destroy Magic stops the Talisman from working, then these things:
1. If you're on the Werewolf/Pit Fiends space, you can't go forward to the Valley of Fire, so you have to go back a space. Unless you can cast something on yourself to miss this turn. Except you can't cast anything, because Destroy Magic is in effect. So, you go back a space. You don't encounter that space. On the following turn, you can progress forward again - but you must REencounter the Werewolf/Pit Fiends, and do them again. Personally, I think this is hilarious, which is the main reason I'd like to see the house rule implemented.
2. If you're on the Valley of Fire already, you don't die. You progress to the CoC as normal.
3. The Amulet counters Destroy Magic, so your Talisman will still work if you have the Amulet.
Those are my thoughts. Many of my thoughts have been faulty, lately, so I'm happy to be wrong.
It would make Destroy Magic a pretty ordinary spell in its current form to be a real game turner. I love the idea of being able to screw up a players run for the crown!
I didn't even think of this until I read it on the old Yahoo Talisman forums and thought it was awesome back then. Upon trying it in a game wielded a similar debate to what guys are having now! I was outvoted in the end and we have played in the ways of the FAQ are now.
he is considered to be using the card. Using cards is optional,
and a character may always choose when to use a card he
has. For example, the Cross allows a character to automatically
destroy Spirits without resorting to psychic combat. The
character may choose not to use the Cross and may attack a
given Spirit instead.
There is a difference between having and using. Having is merely having it in your possession, using is CHOOSING to use an ability in the cards text box.
This is the text on the Talisman card:
You may only enter the Valley of Fire if you HAVE one of the fabled Talismans.
The Talisman merely needs to be in your possession and there is no powers and such that you can CHOOSE to use.
Consider the text on the Destroy Magic Spell:
Cast at the start or end of your turn. No character, including yourself, may cast a Spell or USE any Magic Object until the start of your next turn.
In the context of the game Destroy Magic is supprssing the Optional Powers that you may CHOOSE to USE on a Magic Object, such as the cross. Therefore the Talisman being a passive magic Object is not affected by Destroy Magic. The FAQ is correct.