I love Talisman (i have 2nd - with all expansions, 3rd and 4th edition), but now I play Runebound.

In my humble opinion, I don't think that Runebound will dry up due to Talisman, or vice versa.

andrew33 said:

Well, isn't that a reason not to release more Runebound expansions.

I haven't played 4th edition Talisman, but I used to play Talisman a lot with all the expansions and enjoyed it, though it could go on interminably.  Of the two, I find Runequest more flexible and open-ended.  Also, the immersive sense of being in a fantasy world comes alive more for me in the play of Runebound than in the play of Talisman.  I've never been a big fan of "track" games like Monopoly or of the roll and move mechanic.  Still, in its day, Talisman was one of my favorite games and saw lots of playing time.   

I can see the similarities in concept, but the play is very different.  I fully intend to purchase every new Runebound expansion that comes out, but I can't say that about Talisman.  I doubt I will even get the new 4th edition.  However, as others have said, both games have their core audiences, each fills a niche, and that's as it should be.  Let them both thrive, live long and prosper!

godfeather said:

Sacrilege!

Someone sic the weasel on the blasphemer, who seeks to deprive us of our precious....Runecrack!

The weasel is on his way, with reinforcements. It seems the weasel is now friends with an escaped pet miniature ferrox from Riverwatch and the two are roaming the countryside (and local taverns).

 While they are based off the same concept, I personally view Talisman as good for nostalgia and a good intro level fantasy board-game and Runbound as a more advanced (though still not overly complex) equivilent. 

Talisman seems to drag on and end up boring quite often.

I have RB and 3rd edition Talisman; like RB much much more. Unfortunately, my wife will play Talisman but tried RB once and didn't like it. Ditto for my son.

Bah!

Me thinks your wife and son needs to feel the furry of the Mildless One!

Wow...  Good discussion.  Thanks.

Interesting comments that Talisman is tedious. We played both games in our group, but always found Runebound to be the more tedious one of the two.  I don't know if it was because we were more familiar with Talisman, that we never got confortable with the rules, or if the expansion -> 2nd Ed -> expansion that came out so fast, that finally made us give up on it.  I pull it out ever once and a while and we give it a go, but we usually end up breaking out Talisman before everyone gets too frustrated.

Talisman has the POTENTIAL to drag on awhile as folks resist heading into the Middle Region and further. Players often want to become uber-powerful before making that move.

I think the Reaper expansion might help move things along a bit in this regard! 

Personally, I'm more a fan Talisman than Runebound, but I like them both and there's PLENTY of room for both to co-exist. Other than both being "fantasy boardgames", they don't have a ton of things in common. I look forward to playing lots of BOTH in the future! So many Runebound expansions owned, but so few played so far...

I havent ever played Talisman, but  I have checked out the rules for it. And I suppose your fav one of the two depends on which one you played first. But I do think Runebound looks more fun for those who wants just a bit more "advance" gameplay and more options

Now that I've compared the game experiences of both Talisman and Runebound, I would say that these two games are completely different products. I don't see anything similar between the two, except the Stats increase rule and the strong luck component (dice); it seems to me that many rules of Runebound have been conceived as clear alternatives to Talisman rules. Just compare:

1) movement on three concentric rings based on dice /  movement on hex board, based on dice but with respect to terrain type

2) challenges have random difficulty / challenges are chosen as per difficulty grade

3) many spells to cast / no spells to cast

4) magic objects & followers are randomly found /  magic objects & followers are bought in the cities

5) gold is randomly found / gold is gained as a result of quests

6) interaction with players is high and vital for game winning / interaction with player is minimal and not essential for the game

Talisman is an excellent evolution of some game of old (the Game of the Goose?). It requires minimum practice to be played and won, because everything depends on what players do and what do they score on dice. It has a generic fantasy setting with a simple background. It's a game with a 80s feel.

Runebound is more "immersive" and suited for fantasy initiates; it requires practice and only an experienced player can win it, because the gold must be carefully gained and spent in useful objects (which are the best objects to buy? you must have experience to know). It presents a whole world with a story and fixed Characters and Foes (Vorakesh, Margath and the other Dragon lords). It's a game with a late 90s/XXI century feel.