Jump to content

Moto Subodei

Members
  • Content Count

    287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Moto Subodei

  1. Personally think something like Netrunner's influence system is more likely and probably more fitting to suit the setting! Not that I think it's necessary to lift a mechanic from another game for the sake of it. Would prefer they come up with something designed to fit L5R rather than shoehorning an existing mechanic in.
  2. Personally, in card games I enjoy building the economy. It's another aspect to look after, and while you do get screwed from time to time, for me the trade off is worth it. I was never able to get into hearthstone, I don't enjoy the linear resource development to it. It makes the games feel very samey to me, and it feels a bit more like solitaire sometimes. Saw someone here the other day mention the new game Faerie, and it has a really innovative resource system that feels like a compromise between the two different approaches.
  3. Would be a cool card! This whole conversation has reminded me of Bayushi Paneki Exp2
  4. There is a big side effect to A and that's card information. By virtue of picking their best card in hand hand, you also get to see everything else they have. The card information on top of the actual effect of getting rid of their best card is pretty nuts! If a card like that was in the environment, there would be really no reason for any deck not to play it at all, which isn't a great thing for an environment. I think people would sooner complain about that being NPE than the random discard! And that's where the necessity behind designing random discard is. Somehwere in between as you say, a potentially bad card effect (Would in many situations feel like a dead card, esp when behind), and insanely good card information coupled with removing their best "Surprise" play from the equation. I played a lot of Scorpion too, and there was this double bluff aspect which I agree is nice. I think there is room for all three in some way. Originally I was just challenging the idea that one wasn't necessarily NPE. All depends on the overall environment in the end.
  5. I forgot that random mechanic too! Which I didn't mind so much. I was mainly referring to meat and net damage.
  6. Yeah I get ya, and to be honest, it's pretty difficult to define NPE, because at the end of the day it's important how a mechanic makes a player feel when they are playing the game. There's also a fair point to say that a random discard card effect has potential to piss both players off! Couldn't find the drive to work episode, but here's an article rosewater wrote on it that goes through pros and cons of randomness. http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/kind-acts-randomness-2009-12-14 I actually don't like the intrigue mechanic either in AGOT, part of the reason I stopped playing it. I actually don't mind it as much in Netrunner, but I hate the secretly spending credits in that instead! >.<
  7. Yeah, chop up my words to change their meaning. Good man. What I was saying, despite you being entirely disingenuous to my point by deliberately misquoting me, is just because I don't like something, doesn't make it NPE. I'm just separating my own personal subjective frustration of not liking a mechanic, and my objective view of the mechanic. It depends in what context you are using the term NPE. By your logic, pretty much anything that goes against you could be described as NPE. If you are talking from a more objective design point of view, the term needs to be used a little less liberally. For card discard there are three ways of doing it: Player A plays Discard effect Strategy card on Player B, it is either Player A chooses ( Super Strong card, picking their strongest card and ditching it could be game winning) Player B Chooses (Not Likely to be worth a slot in your deck, player B just discards the lowest priority card) Random (A compromise in between, luck effect, sometimes if falls under option 1 sometimes option 2, but most the time in between) The number 1 version is going to be far more upsetting to play against than card 3. Card 2 will probably just stay in your collection box unless it adds to an overall discard theme (An overall discard theme definitely has potential to be NPE). Card 3 is actually a healthy compromise between the two that also offers some randomness to the game. Just one example of card discard effect being NPE was Razor's Edge Dojo, which received an Errata iirc. It wasn't even random, but it was smothering. In the scheme of things, a one off random effect really isn't that bad. Mark Rosewater has a great Drive To Work episode on randomness in game design. Definitely worth a listen. Edit: Spelling
  8. I consider losing a province my opponent picked to attack NPE. /s Personally I am not overly fond of the random discard effects like in Netrunner and AGOT, however, there's a difference between NPE and something you don't like happening to you. To call random discard mechanics as NPE is really exaggerating. Random effects are healthy in gaming of all kinds.
  9. Mark Rosewater talks a lot about it too in his drive to work podcasts. He maintains that luck is what makes cardgames interesting. If you knew exactly how everything is going to playout every time then it would just be dull.
  10. Yep I considered that. But the only cool character left alive I reckon you'd want to be the marquee character would have been Kanpeki, and seeing as there doesn't seem to be Spider from launch I ruled him out. Didn't think they'd be leading with Naleesh, Dairuko or Shikei.
  11. Joking aside. The thing about the fan of cards spoiler made me suspect a reboot. Even though I've been pretty sure the whole time it wouldn't be!
  12. Makes sense now. Guess I'll be buying two playsets then!
  13. I feel dense. 2 box starter means what exactly? 2 boxes with a different set of cards per box? Or do they just mean that you need two boxes of the same starter for "competitive" play?
  14. You realise you keep having arguments with thin air right? Nobody mentioned anything about the upkeep thing yet you still go off and rebuttle an argument nobody is having. In the nicest possible way, I really don't get what your deal is. Super argumentative. Some people like to set their stall out early and hop on the hate train. Same kind of people in 6 months time will be here saying the new L5R is a terrible game no matter what it looks like. I think many people have already decided they won't like it. I'm actually delighted that Steve Hovarth is on board with the game. Having someone who clearly loves the product so close of its renaissance is only a good thing.
  15. What I will take from it is that the game is in beta, so is therefore very close to finish, which means hopefully some details emerging are imminent.
  16. New game coming out soon! Been thinking of getting some and painting them up in clan colours! https://store.warlordgames.com/collections/test-of-honour/
  17. That's fair. I was asking because this problem isn't exclusive to followers or items though. Becasue of draft every set also needed some anti sendhome card, anti favour card, straighten tech etc. Which I'd imagine was equally as boring to design. Was wondering what the distinct slant with followers was.
  18. From the rumours that have been going round it does sound as though it's going to be quite different. I don't really mind as long as it's a good enjoyable game, and whatever I'm playing feels like samurai and Rokugan. I would have also been happy with a cleaned up version of the original game. (Kinda like what they did with AGOT 1st ed -> 2nd Ed) Regarding attachments, I'm curious what you don't like about them, do you just inherently dislike them or do you think they just continuously got out of hand? I always felt like the main problem with attachments was more to do with the structure of player turns, rather than actual attachments themselves!
  19. To be fair, this is a chicken and egg argument you are making. The reason why it's 1000 years of peace and nothing happening is because the story was never told. There could be all kinds of stuff occurring in these thousand years, it has just never been detailed. We dont know that no major events happened. They have just never been covered. You say with such great confidence that nothing happened, then go on to acknowlege things like Iuchiban and battle of the white stag. The Gazoku is actually the perfect example. If there was never the shadowed tower story arc, the Gazoku filler for this 1000 years of nothing you think exists would never have come to light. But when the current storylines needed some history behind it, they went back to these 1000 years and said, "Yep, this happened around here in this year!". These thousand years you are saying are non-eventful, progressively over the current story arcs became more and more explained as was needed. On a wider Philosophical note. Just becasue you don't know what happened during a certain time frame, it doesn't mean nothing happened!
  20. Yeah this was the problem with it, "High risk high reward" ends up being either too good or too bad! I think they made inroads to fixing dueling, duelist was a better iteration than Double Chi and they began integrating more dueling cards. IMO, dueling should be a normal thing that occurs, not just something dueling decks do, and not something that requires a deck built around it. The problem with it, is that both suffer the same effect for losing a duel, this may appear fair, but for a deck that is not prepared to duel, it just makes it feel non-interactive. I think the duelist trait would need to be changed, and not be geared to help you win a duel, but gives you extra bonuses when you do win a duel, or even a mitigating factor when you lose. I'd also personally change the focus mechanic a little. The card limit to dueling was a good change, and focusing off the top of your deck was a good idea too, but I'd do somehting like, you can only focus a number of times up to your printed chi, +1 if you are a duelist. Also something like, once per turn mechanic that lets you choose and draw a card that was focused in a duel, even one of your opponents. Just to give playing duelists more value. I think duels should also have win conditions to do more powerful versions of action cards that exist already. Like ehanced force bonus/penalty cards, enhanced straighten or bow tech, send home and movement etc. I'd also be tempted to build duelist options into normal bread and butter cards with those kinds fo effects. Which means that your deck doesnt fall to crap when you dont have an adequate duelist on board, but sometimes, you might take a risk to use the duel option to try and swing a battle more in your favour, and again, this would be in an environment when duelists dont have a huge advantage in winning duels, just get more benefit from using them, In short, I'd love if every game and deck had a duel of some kind that was usable! And not just resigned to, "oh God, here we go again, a double chi duelist with Judgment and a secrets on the wind shug on the board" QQ
  21. In my own opinion, best way to do a reboot is to go back to just after the Kami arrived and set up the clans. Rebooting the story back to somewhere lile the scorpion Clan Coup and just continuing on a different path would be a mistake in my eyes. It will just draw endless comparisons, inconsistencies and moaning. By going back far enough you have the benefit of having the clans, without any obligation to stick to strick story arcs, you basically have 1000 years or history to play with which has some detail, but nothing filled in. One cool thing they could do, is release sets based on the pivotal points of the games' history to give old players a nostalgia buzz, and give new players a chance to catch up with the main components of L5R history. Could just spend a couple years releasing one per arch ( Even make it player decision exactly what events, or personalities show up for each arc!) Eg. Scorpion Clan Coup Box, Spirit Wars Box, 4 winds Box, Chagatai's power struggle box, colonies box etc.
×
×
  • Create New...