Jump to content

Desertspiral

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Desertspiral

  1. So if step one or two fails on an action card, the card returns to you hand (or point of origin)?
  2. Hi there, I attended an EC yesterday and had a generally great experience. Having recently got back into L5R though I would consider myself a 'new player'. Even though I have a lot of experience with old5R and other systems, new5R is something i'm still building experience with. That being said in the preamble we were advised that (paraphrasing) 'if a card is played illegally //in the wrong window, conflict, framework, whatever// then you forfeit the cost, and also the card is discarded'. So to me, this seems like a really bizarre direction for the game to go for a couple of reasons. The first is that it is really punishing to new players and more so creates a really negative play sensation when insisted upon. Secondly and this ties into the first it enables a community to prey upon 'gotcha' style interactions. Now I understand that this is a tournament and all the blah blah that goes with that. Also though we're not talking about situations where you play a card and realize that there are no positive outcomes - like using way of the Scorpion vs. student of law for example. Because - as I understand, if a situation occurs that would lead to either an illegal game state or is attempted in the wrong way, then the game simply corrects back to the last legal play state. I don't understand though why it is necessary to dupe people, and punish the error further by taxing the experience differential. There shouldn't be some sort of magical player veto/counter spell. If an action can't be taken - then it can't be taken, and the current framework which allows the action to go on the (imaginary because l5r doesn't have one) stack, then check legality and either proceed or punish; rather than check legality before allowing the action to be processed in my opinion is bad. From the more experienced of you here, what is the logic for this and what positive arguments support that? Thanks
  3. I’m following this from regional Australia where I moved as part of my wife’s career. Currently I’m still waiting for my core sets to show up and it’s a four hour drive to the nearest town with a play group. I would love to go to worlds and represent (and have been playing Scorpion since Jade), and yet right now that isn’t really an option. In fact it’s probably one of the most awkward spots to be if you want to get to a US con. So all that being said take this with a grain grain of salt. One of my best friends played Lion and whilst he may have felt that breach of etiquette was the most npe in the game; I felt that Gohei+charge was that most npe thing in the game. My point being that experience is relative and some mileage will vary based upon position and perspective. I’m still reserving judgement on whether I’m upset by this decision or supportive. The main reason being that personally I feel (in L5r particularly) a player should attempt to further the aims and objectives of the faction that they most resonate with. For a Dragon player in particular the decision is felt more keenly as Dragon and Scorpion have always been strongly allied together. That of course is all relative as I don’t really know enough about new5r to hold a valid opinion on the mechanical side. So if in their way Dragon wisdom has opened a new and interesting path then that’s great. If on the other hand the decision was born from a sense of hubris then that is not so great. Shiba Aikune chooses once more nay?!
  4. I have to say the last sentence of Duty blows my mind. These are two Samurai bushi entering into a duel (over the death of a clan champion) and one of them may survive, the only way I can see that happening is if Tsuko loses and that would be ultra lame. In fact if the duel ends in anything but glorious death then the story will plunge into deep deep shame.
  5. Comparing l5r to agot there is a compunction to try and fit 'claim' in, and yet the system as is seems fairly robust. If the lion lion fiction proves anything it's that cracking provinces through 'wiles' is apparently a thing and the game as is seems to reflect that in mechanics. I'm certainly happy to try it and one thing I do like is that it provides the 'political' clans a second path to victory rather than just scratching their head with the combined 2f. Lion switch was always hard to face into as the flexibility was a huge strength and now at least every clan has the ability to crack provinces in one fashionable n or another particularly in an asymmetrical match up.
  6. I'm not sure what lens you're choosing to look through, and I don't agree with your assessment.
  7. I'm not sure how this is any more relevant than the other people who go out of there way to support communities?
  8. That would be great for all the Austen fans :). The heart wants what the heart wants. I'm sure there are many people who empathise deeply with the idea of the Spider clan and yet somehow in a world where the tag line has always been "...Where Honour is stronger than steel" it seems like a lost opportunity to croon for a time where the focus is upon a group of people who are the antithesis of the elements that I, and dare I say many people gravitated to L5r in the first place - which was High fantasy Samurai, and the legend that sprung from the Day of thunder.
  9. This came up because Kokojin was Rich wolfs personal fantasy and in order to force the square peg into a round hole - he rewrote Togashi no be not a celestial Dragon but a mere body snatching thief. Ironically though despite Togashi no longer being a Dragon Hoshi remains an 'unexplained phenomenon' half Dragon... This was basically the beginning of the end for L5r (imo) Additionally the whole premise of this thread is dumb. Spider clan was not good for the story, not good for the game and I feel contributed massively to the world of L5r going to crap, and if FFG L5r is just going to be another 'evil spiky bits' wet dream then I have no interest in contributing towards it.
  10. Philosophy question (Dragon clan) Dear design team, From the last (Lion) video, there was a great sense of reverence and passionate discourse surrounding the fiction and roots of L5R. In particular with regards to the dawn of the empire, and test of the Emerald champion. Given that such iconic figures as Akodo and Matsu are largely consistent with the representations that L5R fans have come to know and love; as a student of history (and a fan) I would consider it a real privilege if You (the design team) would be open to expanding on some of the other iconic characters from L5R. Particularly, I would be very interested in understanding the palette that Togashi will be painted with? kindest regards ~ Bayushi Okanuro
  11. I'm sure there will be a mix of teams that bow for effect, and others that provide passive benefits.
  12. Cool - that was a great video
  13. Is there a link to today's stream?
  14. HI there @Vermillion Good points. I guess what i was trying to say above is that. Building a deck that you hope will do well can be an expensive investment, due to card placement within the expansions. Where sas, take another CCG that focuses heavily on factions and yet, lacks the competative prizes of MtG - L5R, you can build a pretty decent deck for a lower price margin because of the singles market. Also i suppose with L5R, as sets rotate, often times they'll rotate cards back in as well. I just know that having to buy 2 (maybe 3) core sets, a house set and 10+ chapter packs to get a good deck going is a pretty steep front loaded cost. Cheers
  15. Hi there, I've found this thread really interesting so far. I recently started playing AGoT around christmas time last year (2012). I enjoyed the books and some freinds i was staying with also enjoyed them so i bought a core set and had a few games. Then i found that I enjoyed the game system, out of the box is seemed pretty fun and I had a sense of connection with the characters and so forth. SO i bought a couple of the house boxes and built some decks and played htem against each other and we were having a decent time. Fast forward a couple of months and whilst attending Cancon (in AUS) i went over to the AGoT players and had a couple of games. After getting destroyed several times over to rapant control mechanics we started talknig about the price and how much it costs to really get into the game and all that. Given the way the cards are spaced out and everyhting, i was concerned that it would end up being very expensive to play on a competative basis. I couldn't beleive it when i was casually told that the buy in was ~1,000 as if it were no matter. Simply put whether you're rich or poor a thousand dollars is considerable money and not something that you want to be told is the entrance for a given game - even if it is 'relatively cheap to sustain thereafter'. I have to say i enjy the game and love the setting, but there are a few things which i find really disconcerting about the whole thing, and after discussing it with the freinds i started the game with we mostly feel the same. The entry price is really prohibitive, especially the idea that three core sets are needed. The card bloat is phenominal. The cyclic nature of magic was used earlier in this discussion as a negative, whereas i feel for any game to thrive in a competative setting there needs to be resets and redress to the state of the game on a reasonable time scale. My favourite game L5R, did this really successfully, and overall it helped the game survive. Almost every game i've played has ended up is some kind of ridiculous control choke that is extremely unfun, and seems to be endemic of the game as a whole. The control options are severe and easy to use and they seem (from my limited experience) to outperform rush (generally the counterpoint to control) without trying. Readily available board resets are also to blame here. The restricted list and banned list are great tools, however, competatively speaking they are band aids when a face lift (reset) is probably more appropriate. Magic might have simple and elegant mechanics that can be confused as boring, its also doesn't (to mk knowledge - since i stopped in 5th), have to diferentiate between 'draw' and 'reveal into hand', as a method of lawyering its way around its own rules. I Like the Barratheons, but apparently they suck at control - ergo they are bottom tier, as with L5r i approached this game with a sense of faction loyalty - so where is the fun in knowing that your faction is on the bottom and likely to stay there outside of jumping through hoops? I went through card DB, and put together a deck i thought would be interesting (if not competative - see above), and then checked all the packs i'd need. I got pretty sick very fast of seeing that there were ones and two's of the cards i wanted in any given pack. Sure it's great if you've bene playing from day dog, but the ability to buy singles would be really sweet compared to paying $20 AU for a pack and only needing one or two cards out of it. It's almost funny because there is a similar arguement going on regarding table top wargaming at present. That Warmachine is starting to outsrip warhammer because the entry price (all else equal) is so much more attractive. Anything that wants to survive needs fuel, and players ar ethe LCG's fuel. Anyway, i don't really want to ruffle anyones feathers, and this game is great, that doesn't mean it is without it's issues. Cost and card bloat are the two major barriers to this game and coincdentally if you fix the latter the first takes care of itself.
  16. Desertspiral said: Ok thanks totalgit, That seems to really clear it up. So essentially any BOLD: Blah ability is a triggered response and any 'trait' is a triggered ability. For instance, Aeron Damphair (Greyjoy starter) would be a triggered ability, but 'Superior claim', 'Red vengeance', 'Obey the king', Cersei Lannister (Base set), and Winterfell kennels would all be triggered responses, despite being an assortment of (forgive the comparison) sorceries, instants and interupts? Is that about the right of it? Cheers mate DS Ok, so i can't find the edit post button. I got this wrong. I missed the triggered ability is a sub set of triggered effect. So Aeron from above is just a passive effect text, and everythign else are triggered effects, and additionally Cersei and the Kennels are triggered abilities?? That should be right - i think? cheers again DS
  17. Ok thanks totalgit, That seems to really clear it up. So essentially any BOLD: Blah ability is a triggered response and any 'trait' is a triggered ability. For instance, Aeron Damphair (Greyjoy starter) would be a triggered ability, but 'Superior claim', 'Red vengeance', 'Obey the king', Cersei Lannister (Base set), and Winterfell kennels would all be triggered responses, despite being an assortment of (forgive the comparison) sorceries, instants and interupts? Is that about the right of it? Cheers mate DS
  18. H there, I've just started playing aGoT, and have a quick query about trggered responses. I know this might seem really basic and evident, however, after re-reading the book it didn't seem that the term was quantified. So i'm asking if it basically means - responses, or is there a more correct answer, for instance traits or passive abilities etc. Anyway, thanks for the hhelp. Cheers DS
  19. Hi there, I've recently just started playing this game and think it's really great. The other night i was reading over the rules again and realised that once uniques hit the dead pile they are essentially locked out. My house of choice is Barratheon and outside of milling myself with Asshai initiates i don't see a reliable way to maintain board position with a lot of uniques (which most of my deck currently is), so my question is do people generally run more non uniques and just 1-2 copies of key uniques or do they bite the bullet and just run the uniques with saving mechanics? Hope that all made sense, cheers and thanks for any replies DS
×
×
  • Create New...