Jump to content

Papa Midnight

Members
  • Content Count

    277
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Papa Midnight

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

859 profile views
  1. And that is quite not what I was thinking GW might do. Oh well, we had a good run...
  2. Oh yes, that is rather common (no pun intended) around my neck of the woods.
  3. You're right; previous baggage should be jettisoned. However, I would also like to see some form of 'background support' that addresses or takes into account previous (and/or existing) L5R history..... thus, bring in a new team (and don't drag in previous L5R brand writers) and sprinkle that with support personnel from existing FFG personnel. I hope that is making sense, as it seems somewhat cyclical in my opinion.
  4. Simply put: Should tournament and campaign results decide the direction of new card design and overall direction of L5R? I ask this in all sincerity. Your thoughts.
  5. Not wanting to sound pedantic here, but when I was playing the game, the majority if not outright all players were simply a mono-Clan deck, with some thrown in goodies. Maybe my memory doesn't serve me well here, but this is what I remember. Having lost contact with the game for nearly 12-13 years does mean that a good number of changes must have occurred, to which I cannot speak to. But this format of deck building (single Clan, with a few 'outside' cards) was the favored method of gaming, no?
  6. *bump* While there are now several threads which continue to discuss the various Clans and their gaming flexibility, I thought I bump this thread up to see if there was any more focused discussion related to Clans and their associated strengths/weaknesses and such. I chose to highlight the quote above in order to garner some more conversation, as it parallels my general thoughts as well. Thoughts?
  7. Um, imo, L5R can be done with a single deck design in mind. I'm in the minority, I think. I agree. But we have to make certain assumptions when discussing things. Obviously, if there's only one deck, then distinguishing between them for determining which one makes you lose by decking out doesn't matter. Wholly agreed. Not knowing what direction FFG is going with (and they not knowing either, at this point) is what I was working off of.
  8. Um, imo, L5R can be done with a single deck design in mind. I'm in the minority, I think.
  9. May I be brave enough to suggest that, given prior FFG games, the decking of your opponent (opponent running out of cards in their deck/decks) would be another manner of 'victory?'
  10. Overall, imo, this will be the most "reasonable" model that FFG will/should follow. Why do I say this? A bottom-up approach is the easiest manner to carry out the initial planning and design of the game, followed by the insertion of additional elements/storyline to the given (designed) clans. Regardless of their approach, I cant in all honesty envision FFG $&@#ing this CCG up, if one draws upon the rich, quite descriptive background of the L5R story. Again, this is imo.
  11. I feel woefully lost with known L5R history that I cannot comment on this thread. Having played and followed the game's storyline (albeit many years ago), I strongly believe that there will be much to read and become immersed in.
  12. Well said. While similar responses have been posted, I thought I would highlight this suggestion/take on the upcoming L5R CCG.
×
×
  • Create New...