agarrett

Members
  • Content count

    140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About agarrett

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

189 profile views
  1. Only the defeated need explain their behavior. Victory is its own excuse. That is entirely within the theming of Rokugan, and it is something every Great Clan knows, even if none (even the Scorpion) would say so out loud.
  2. Based on AEG's version of the game, and hints from the recent stories, I think Naga are a pretty solid bet at this point. The elemental dragons seem highly likely as well. Unicorns and pegasi are too western for this setting, and seem highly unlikely. Other Asian creatures that have made appearances in the past are kenku, ogres (OK, not particularly Asian there...), and some invented for the game like zokujin and Nezumi. So yes, we will likely see some mythical creatures
  3. Thanks a lot. I had not seen that last link. Appreciate the hand.
  4. I'm looking at attending this event as well, but am having some trouble finding information. What day of PAX Unplugged is this tournament running? How do we register / get in to the Kotei, as opposed to the convention? Thanks for any help or pointers to the information.
  5. While I think that would be both cool, and a good way to add new factions, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate and rain on your parade a bit. The biggest problem I see with this is the role cards - especially when it comes to tournaments. There are only 10 possible roles, so they're limited in adding new clans. Now, there are ways around this - only the base 7 clans can play roles at all being the first one that comes to my mind. But, if they do add an Imperial (or Shadowlands, or whatever else) stronghold, they'll need to make a rules change as well for this. Next problem is story prize / consideration. They'll now have to ensure there's something available if an Imperial wins a story prize. Again, not insurmountable, but each additional option does come with a cost, as we know from the AEG days. Again, neither of these would block the idea in itself, but I hope FFG considers them and plans it out in advance. And like you, I'll keep an eye out for any such developments.
  6. Interesting. I assumed the exact opposite - that everyone stayed where they are, but the new battle is somewhere else. Whoever is better at moving their people over there has a big advantage. And Unicorn is very good at moving their people. Still, that's a guess at this point, and you're right we'll need either new rules or a serious clarification.
  7. That... would come as a surprise, and not a terribly pleasant one. That said, they haven't done any previews for sets beyond Tears of Amaterasu, so I'm hopeful there's some miscommunication here.
  8. No. The doomed shugenja is not unique, this ability to discard a copy to add fate to the character applies to unique characters only. That said, the Doomed Shugenja is only barred from adding fate when brought into play from dynasty. Anything else that adds fate to a character will work fine on her.
  9. We're having an opening day tournament a week late This Sunday at 1PM at the Comics Closet in Shrewsbury PA. Just in case anyone in the Baltimore area is looking for another L5R hit, we're about 45 minutes north of the city.
  10. Hmph. Kinda neutral on this one. There's nothing wrong with it, but there's also nothing that grabs me and pulls me in either. The set-up, chasing an unknown foe south towards the Shadowlands, is fine, but again, there's not enough there to really make it exciting or high stakes either. Story setting is good, and there are plenty of plot lines they might be setting up in the future - return of the Naga, Dark Moto, or even a Shadowlands infiltrator like the characters think (and therefore we readers assume is wrong.) It's good, solid groundwork. And that's necessary. It's also unexciting, though, and excitement - especially at the start of a story or game - is also necessary. Anyway, I'm happy enough with this one, but also hoping it'll be the inverse of the last two-parter, with the second part containing more interest.
  11. I don't know if I'd go quite that far. At least for myself, I kind of flag this as a potential problem and something to watch for. But at least for now, it looks like a reasonable balance and something I have to keep strongly in mind during deck construction. By the way, I'd seen some people saying this was a pointless discussion since there aren't really any rules questions or changes. At least for me, this discussion of deck design and rules implications - and a little side of game design - has been very useful and illuminating. Sure, we're not looking at a change, but just thinking about the rules like this can be very helpful. So thanks for bringing it up.
  12. One practical effect is to encourage balanced forces. In world, samurai are supposed to be great on both the battlefield and court, at least in theory. Having these 'switch the battle type' cards, some repeatable and some not, says that the old-style L5R deck that tries to overpower in one area while ignoring weaknesses in others is no longer the best way to go - it might or might not even be viable. Now, there has been a big change. Old5R decks would concentrate on one victory condition, while now we're talking about one stat. Nevertheless, the high-military, just-enough-politics-to-defend, deck (or vice versa) will face severe weaknesses against decks that are set up to swap conflict types. I suspect that's deliberate.
  13. No. It isn't. Sorry, but even using that definition (which I agree is the correct one) the standard is use 'without authority or right.' And you're just assuming that the designers did not have one or both of those. So, who grants authority to use elements of a foreign culture? Well, there actually isn't anyone. Any member of the culture? By that standard, AEG and FFG are easily in the clear. The members of the culture of the time being used? Sorry, they're all dead. The current government? I don't believe they have any such procedure set up, and would probably laugh if you tried to get permission (or, depending on the bureau and person, would charge a fee and grant it pointlessly.) But try to answer if you take this seriously, how do you gain such an authority? Alternatively, they are using elements of the culture without the right to do so. Once again, how do you gain such a right? Modern governments grant copyrights for (theoretically) limited times, but the elements of the story AEG and FFG are using are long past even those times. We also protect elements or information that the owner makes serious attempts to keep secret / personal. Once again, there's no such element involved in these stories. So, my claim here is that all the elements FFG is using are ones that are public domain, and they have the appropriate rights. I'd be interested in hearing any coherent and consistent definition of rights that works otherwise.
  14. A partial disagreement. I suspect that in this context, they intend 'appropriate' to follow the third, rather than first, definition: "to take or make use of without authority or right." In this case, the fact that the usage is not exclusive is irrelevant. However, and here we get into the reason it's only a partial disagreement, and mostly agreement, is that there's no real way to figure out who has the 'authority or right' to grant use of cultural items. Let's go with an example that is non-controversial today, but at one time was, and that is martial arts. Back in the 60's, dojos would routinely refuse to teach non-Orientals. Bruce Lee was a groundbreaker in this arena - his famous (OK, probably apocryphal) statement "You want to learn, I want to teach. What's the problem?" In any event, he absolutely did teach non-Orientals, and today that's taken for granted. Frankly, I think we're all better off for such things. Anyway, not to put too fine a point on it, but cultures are not monolithic objects. They're made up of people. People being people, they'll have different opinions, and some will want to share their ideas and practices while other won't. The rhetoric of cultural appropriation says the latter group wins, and I think that's a pretty bad practice.
  15. On the good side, he was trying to honestly grapple with something he considers a problem (and isn't alone in considering it so.) On the bad side, I don't agree it's a problem. Appropriation is taking, or using, without the permission of the owner. When it comes to a culture or story, I find it sufficiently difficult to determine the owner, so can't quite agree it's a problem. Attempt to avoid needless insult, to be sure (especially in a commercial venture like a game - why drive away some audience members?) but that's generally sufficient.