Jump to content

Moto Subodei

Members
  • Content Count

    287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Moto Subodei

  1. As someone who usually likes to have loads of decks built at once, I never felt like any spares I have in any game are a waste!
  2. Aye, the silver lining of l5r being put on hold is I discovered Netrunner. Really awesome game. Will be playing both games when l5r is launched, and will probably continue collecting netrunner given that It'll cost me less than what I was spending on l5r ccg alone! For me it was AGoT 2.0 I think I'll be playig both as well, but I don't rule out dropping AGoT. It'll depend on how boring or fun the meta will be in AGoT next year. I started AGOT 2.0 also but personally felt the meta has already got to that point. Stopped enjoying deck building in particular after I got wolves of the north.
  3. The trap is a fact that 1 CS is a kind of demo that will provide you completely different view of whole game. Highlander type decks (1 copy of every card) with so small synergies may just irritate. AN:R or DT:R was best in their classes becasue their structure provided options for much synergied deck building options. Later FFG changed their mind and that was IMHO a mistake . Instead buying 1 CS only i recommend proxying whatever you want in 3x manner, play some games with "real decks" and then decide to purchase playset. It's much safier. Used to do exactly this before buying singles for L5R before Definitely a good approach.
  4. Aye, the silver lining of l5r being put on hold is I discovered Netrunner. Really awesome game. Will be playing both games when l5r is launched, and will probably continue collecting netrunner given that It'll cost me less than what I was spending on l5r ccg alone!
  5. LCG costs less becasue it's mostly much, much smaller game comparing to CCG. Imagine MMO where you have one medium size dungeon to explore but you have access to all classes/races for one (not so cheap) entry fee and monthly subscription (LCG), and another one with 5 big dungeons but where you can choose only one class/race and you could customize it by buying equipment as singles. You just spend your money in different way. Yes, L5R CCG is completionist's nightmare, but for many owning whole collections is much more satisfying than "completing" LCG by one visit in your local store. Really money you spent on your game LCG or CCG depends only on you. Your cheapest tournament LCG deck costs you at least 3x CS (A:NR and SW maybe were exceptions, but it's true in AGoT 2.0 and WH40K:C). And when i'm talking about CCG i'm talking about L5R not MtG. Sorry for replying myself, but i'm still tired of all "LCG is cheaper than CCG" when someone forgets to mention differences in both formats, scale of game, playing formats, OP environment etc. I don't think that mmo comparison is really accurate. Netrunner is a complete game with 7 main factions, each with sub themes. You'd get about the exact same from a ccg. The only difference between ccg and lcg is the distribution model, how you obtain the cards, this does not limit creativity or the potential size of the card pool in a negative way. There's nothing stopping ffg releasing the same size core set as l5r did in ivory. (370ish cards in a base set, with at a guess approx 50% being reprints) CCG's suffer from a huge amount of glut. They need to keep a certain pool size of cards to fill up boosters and encourage rarity and variance. The symptom of this is a lot of cards are pretty much unusable. There is also the issue of reprints. You would buy a booster of a core set, and end up with a rare, uncommon or common of a card you have hundreds of already from collecting a previous edition. Whereas the core sets are larger, a fair chunk of those cards are reprints. There's also the need to make boosters draftable. This led to more redundant cards in the card pool. At the creation of a new expansion set, there were already 15 or so cards that have to be in the set, just to sustain draft. Every expansion needed a straighten card, a bow, send home, favor hate and a suite of holdings. Each LCG card directly addresses the environment without these extra considerations. You don't end up with the same repetition. You are essentially arguing quantity over quality. An lcg version of l5r won't need 6 different favour hate cards in one edition. A CCG does. It really bloats the card pool.
  6. well said Gaffa. I think the only disadvantage the LCG model has is that if you are late the the party the entry cost can seem really really steep (experiencing this myself with netrunner atm). If you are fortunate enough to get on board with it from the start, then it feels like a pretty cheap hobby. When I was playing L5R, I was buying singles of all the cards I wanted from a set. Every 3 months or so I was spending around 150 euro. To take netrunner as an example, the first batch of expansions cycle out after 5 years. In that time you end up paying approx 540 (36*15) euro on data packs, which is around 110 euro a year, then add in the initial cost of the evergreen core set and deluxe expansions and you are talking another 240 (3*40 + 4*30), which you wont need to spend again on the next cycle. That's 780 euro over 5 years, which is 160 a year. To keep up with l5r at the same pace, to play 2 clans, even if you just buy singles you are racking up around 2875 over 5 years, which is 575 a year (depending on whether we would get 3 or 4 expansions in that year) plus two starters adding around 50 euro on top. That doesn't even get you a playset. To break it down the cost over a 5 year cycle starting from scratch and assuming to be tournament competitive to as high a degree as possible CCG (l5r case example, two clans tournament ready) Euro 2875 5 yrs Euro 575 p/a LCG (Full playset) Euro 780 5 yrs Euro 156 p/a What's more is that your proposed change will not affect your pocket as much as you make out. Again assuming you play for five years, and forgetting that the core sets never go out of legality, you are accusing ffg of gouging when they are taking an extra 16 euro a year from you assuming you will be playing their game for 5 years. The LCG netrunner model is approx 4 times cheaper than the CCG counterpart over a 5 year period. Core sets in l5r also cycle out, whereas netrunner ones don't, so once you've invested in them you have a core set of cards for life, which is great. Personally 156 euro a year is not a huge investment into a hobby when I am playing it several times a week. I feel I am spending an awful lot less now on netrunner than I was on l5r, and that's even while aggressively collecting a backlog instead of just keeping up. CCG's are where the real price gouging is at, not lcg.
  7. Wonder would it be an option for ffg to split the starter box into 3 starters, buying all 3 gets you a full playset and have the clans split amongst them.
  8. That might explain the apparent clamp down on all the Onyx related material and why we still aren't allowed to see it. I think this is a decent shout tbh. One other possibility is that they wouldn't want to show people what they decided not to give them, if that makes sense.
  9. God I hope not. L5Rs "style" has been all over the place and it wasn't ever really defined. They had some great artist over the years, but a unified art direction was never a thing. I mean they even credited outsource graphic design studios on a lot of their art during the last few arcs. I guess it's a matter of taste then! I quite like the differing styles in a game. I don't want everything to follow the same theme or design, I find it boring. I personally think it works this way because different factions have different requirements for the art and theme of their art. Just a case of horses for courses.
  10. Indeed, Except for the pre gold stuff from when wotc were in charge. I'm more curious to see if they will continue the same (theme wise) design path as was laid out.
  11. There's still no new artwork from FFG. Seems the use recycled stuff only. For me it's important because i want to know what kind of stylistic they want to use in this game. As you've noticed every LCG has its own graphic style from beginning till end. I think if anything the art that they used for the announcement is providing an answer for your question. They seem to be keeping the style of the game under aeg. Even the banner that was in gencon may as well have had an AEG logo on the bottom. As pointed out already also, GOT kept the same style, and if you look back on the older netrunner cards they have definitely kept in the style of that also. In fairness to aeg, whatever you can say about some of the questionable card environments at the time and some design issues, their presentation, and in particular card art ended up being really top tier towards the end. I think FFG recognise this and would be mad not to piggy back off it.
  12. I see a lot of people here reading into this, and others saying how it means nothing. I think both views are correct in ways. For me it is a good sign. Yes as Kakita Shiro says, it says nothing except they want to make money off IP they purchased holds some water. However at the same time it's indicative that they would like to preserve the history of the game, which to me shows they have confidence in the product. It shows the difference also between AEG and FFG. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember it being possible to buy pdf's of the 1st and 2nd edition books? Hopefully this announcement is also a little hint that there will be some information about the game at Gencon. We are almost halfway through the wait that we thought we'd have for the new version so more info is due any moment now.
  13. Been playing a lot of AGOT2nd ed and I must say I really miss the feel of big battles. For me, that is what L5R excelled at, you felt like you were fighting big battles all the time.
  14. I think it's more than that. A duel is supposed to decide who is right. Now, there are problems with that concept -- from a game perspective, it's obvious that "I'm right and you're wrong" has zero mechanical effect, while "I'm a Kakita and you're not" has a lot -- but that's the idea. Once you ask the kami to help out, though, you are blatantly acknowledging that the deciding factor will not be who's right and who's wrong; it will be who has more advantages in his favor. There is no way you can allow magic in a duel and maintain the fiction of what a duel is supposed to represent. Uh, what? As in my previous comment, I have to ask: what's your basis for this statement? L5R fictions? Because I've done quite a lot of reading about historical societies, Japan included, and boiling everything down to "it's one on one fights" is not anywhere close to a good description of what court is really like. The notion that doing stuff there is comparable to the sacred, ritualized space of a duel, the tool by which Tengoku supposedly makes it clear who is in the right, is absolutely croggling to me -- as Fumi said, it's more like a skirmish, if we're going to make a comparison to a fight. And nobody has ever suggested that it's dishonorable or inglorious to use spells in that kind of combat. Even if we take your framing of court: why is it okay to supernaturally interfere with your bushi friend's physical fight against another bushi, but not okay to supernaturally interefere with your courtier friend's verbal fight against another courtier? Read the Winter Court RPG books (I think there are 3, it is either 1st and 2nd edition). It is all detailed there. Furthermore the part where courtiers go to "court" and end up in open debate is not only a very small section of what the various courts consist of (Ivory court, winter court, summer court etc) but is only a part that is reserved to the highest ranking members of clans, so it isn't something that random Bayushi Bob gets invited to. Each court, for example the Winter Court is just a time of festival where people from across clans gather in the same place, people often confuse it with our modern perception of courts, where it is a discusson of law, in Rokugan it is to build relations and prevent wars not the modern perception of litigation. When all the clans are gathered, it is the perfect opportunity to socialise with, and partake in challenges with members of other clans, this is when and why so many personal challenges take place, sadane for example, being one. If your clansman, was partaking in a sadane challenge against a crane, and you were to use magic to help them win the challenge, it isdishonorable behaviour. To do so would be breaking both Honor, and Courage. Honor because presumably the other party has not been informed that a shugenja is using magic to aid him, and courage because he is lacking the courage to take on the task alone. Do the later books interpret the role of court differently? Probably. I personally use the experience and resources that I have built up over the last 15-20 years to establish the picture of rokugani culture. If someone is only reading from 4th ed, where there is little to no mention at all of the concept of personal contests, then they are going to have a different view to me, who pretty much established his view on the courts and systems from earlier editions. There is also the matter of people thinking it is ok to use magic to manipulate social outcomes if you don't get caught. How am I to know, if bayushi bob isnt on awareness steroids from soshi steve? The answer is, it doesn't matter. A samurai doesn't refrain from doing something for fear of getting caught, but only because it is the right thing to do. - Think for a moment, if a seppun saw a shugenja obviously casting an air spell on his clansmen who was speaking to the Emperor,Would this be acceptable?
  15. But you could say that about almost anything a shugenja does. Why is it then okay for them to help in a skirmish, when that would be an admission that the bushi couldn't win without that help? Or to use commune to aid an investigation, when that would imply the magistrate isn't good enough to solve it on his own? Regarding duels, it seems to me that it's just a result of the fact that it's supposed to be 1-on-1, with no outside help whatsoever, magical or otherwise. But court isn't 1-on-1, so applying the same restriction isn't intuitive. Court is the exact same. I think there is a misconception of a lot of people as to what "court" is in Rokugan. It is mostly a place of challanges, like I mentioned above in things like sadane, performance, go etc.The discussion and debate between two courtiers is seen as a "1 on 1" also, where two courtiers (sometimes more than) verbally spar with eachother, it is very much a game to them, with a lot of chuckles and guffawing in the background The reason why it is perfectly acceptable in a skirmish, is the same reason 2 bushi fighting off bandits is acceptable. It is not a direct contest of between samurai. And I do agree with you! this kind of stuff is not really fleshed out in 4th ed. That just doesn't mean it doesn't exist in Rokugani lore. I haven't read all of the 4th ed expansions, so I am not sure what is said about courts in that, but the core book for sure doesn't have the space to go through it all sadly.
  16. Because it is an admission on behalf of the samurai that they are not good enough without that help. AND It is the Shugenja buffing the samurai without him knowing, it is the shugenja questioning the samurais ability. It really isn't a leap at all, and it infact has nothing to do with the shugenja abilities, the divine or anything, it is to do with the fact that samurai have a strong sense of personal pride and honor. It is the same reason it is not permitted in duels. I think not understanding why, is not actually understanding samurai and the tenants of bushido.
  17. I sure hope they have some crab clan or shadowlands lore! Or else all the lost guy has to do is keep his mouth shut and "recruit" a few more people into his order!
  18. Yeah, that's all fair enough. And I can completely understand/agree people being lost in the setting from only reading the 4th ed core book, have even seen it myself when new players joined our rpg group. They were just lucky they had people who knew so much of the previous lore to help them through. It is why I guess, having 20+ years of lore is both a blessing and a curse. Having a book of limited size means you can't cover everything, it is why I would encourage someone to use the internet resources in conjunction with the book when establishing a setting and plot. Even to learn things about all the various regions, castles, courts, competitions etc that aren't covered in the book. At the end of the day though, if you only use the 4th ed book, and portray some things "wrong" or not according to canon, then what harm has been done really? It usually encourages discussion during games anyways, I have lost track of the number of OOC discussions I've had down through the years about the setting with my buddies.
  19. When did I ever claim that it was? I brought up the parts of the chart that are potentially relevant to this discussion; there's no point in referencing "Accepting a bribe" or "Enduring an insult to your ancestors" when talking about whether using magic in court is dishonorable. But what is the foundation for that "of course"? Burning down a building is a crime; this is well understood by players without needing to read past editions or do online research, because pretty much every society ever has considered the destruction of property to be a Bad Thing. By contrast, if using a buff designed to help you do social stuff in a major social context is something you're not supposed to do . . . that isn't intuitive. And reading up on the sources for L5R won't help me figure that one out, because in historical Japan there were no air kami you could call on to give you +1k1 +Air to your ability to talk. I see combat spells, I think "I'm supposed to use these in combat." I see social spells, I think "I'm supposed to use these in social situations." If I'm not supposed to think that, then yes, I do need the book to explain that to me. Because otherwise, there is no bloody way for me to know. I'm confused, do you actually not know this? Or is it just that it isn't in the 4th edition book that you are complaining? Because again, your gripe is not with the lore of l5r, but with the 4th ed content. The reason why it is a breach of etiquette is because courts in Rokugan are not courts like in real life. They are full of personal challenges between people from other clans as well as critical addresses from the key figures of Rokugan. Like in an Iaijutsu duel, it is dishonorable for a shugenja to interfere with this challenge because it is meant to be a duel of personal strength/ability. Even with challenges that require social rolls (which I presume to which you are referring), like sadane, they are seen as a personal challenge. So getting "buffs" and entering the challenge is a dishonest act. It is the tenant of honesty that get's broken, and any break of one of bushido's virtues should lead to honor/glory loss. Just because a spell gives a social buff, does not mean it is perfectly acceptable to use in all situations where the buff could be beneficial. It is like you said about burning the building down, it isn't explicitly stated in the book (I presume) that this should lead to a loss of honor, but instead your intuition tells you that it is. If you understand the tenants of bushido, then for a samurai to accept a "buff" to get one over on another samurai in a fair contest is shameful. That is the intuitive decision that the player/GM should be making. But as you said, yeah it probably isn't in the 4th ed books explicitly. But all the tenants of Bushido are there, and samurai try to follow these to the letter. They are extremists remember, everything has to be by the book. Accepting outside help to win a challenge, goes against one of the tenants of bushido and is also something I think any self respecting samurai would be embarrassed about doing, because it basically says "I am not good enough to win without it" . Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean it is the most honorable thing to do. You CAN use the fire spell on a building but your intuition tells you it is a bad idea. It is the same for interfering in the courts to influence the outcome.
  20. You don't have to spend 500$ and own the complete 4th edition to understand the setting... Google it, read the online story, do some research in a library, look some movies which was used as an inspirations. We live in a nice era for these kind of research, just use it... The l5r wiki is quite good too. The guy has done a great job keeping it up to date and resourcing all the material. And it's all free.
  21. You are right, I am all about the high fantasy of L5R. I wouldn't be in favour of "balancing" shugs. I can just accept they are more powerful and it really doesn't bother me! (I usually don't play shugs btw ) For me, the best option if you did want to balance is to just make the casting difficulty higher. How it is now, Spells have a mastery level, it takes that number of rounds to cast. You can make raises (up to your void ofc) to increase the speed you can cast it by one round with each raise. You just need to make this harder to do. That way you keep the powerlevel, and you can't insta nuke a guy standing in front of you with a rank 5 mastery spell in one round. I'd just say you can only make one raise to increase speed, 1 raise for effect, 1 for additional targets. Instead of being able to dump you raise slots on reduce cast by 1 round each. (maybe a free raise for your element can be directed to reducing cast speed.) As it is now, a void 3 shug, can instantly cast a mastery 4 spell (1 free raise). If it took 2 rounds instead, using my suggestion, it's two rounds of standing around waiting to get hit ! A ritual requires multiple people, and can be cool, and there is already loads of lore for that, but I wouldn't be putting any powerful ability into a ritual just because they are good spells. That is IF I wanted to balance shugs to be the same power level as Bushi! Which I do not!
  22. It's natural to want to contribute, and it's natural to feel like you ought to stand out in the field you specialize in, whether that's skirmishes, court, the battlefield, whatever. If someone else can do your specialty better, and a bunch of other stuff besides, it's easy to wonder why your character is in the party at all. Every player should get a chance to shine once in a while. Sure, a good GM will manage to make that happen, regardless. But that job becomes much harder when some characters are just better than others. Why force the GM to balance things himself, when you can build it into the system in the first place? The GM already has a bunch on his plate, why add to the load? Well sure, it's not the only easily-broken part of the game system. It's the one this thread is about, though. Yeah true that! I'm just wary of the "NERF SHUGZ" bandwagon.I'd hate to see a new edition with watered down (nice pun? ) shugenja just so bushi and courtiers would roll the same number of dice as them.
  23. As MaxKilljoy said, there ought to be Honor and/or Glory losses written into the system if doing that kind of thing really does mark the character as "a scumbag." But there aren't. Using magic in court isn't a Low skill; it might be a breach of etiquette, but I don't recall any discussion anywhere in 4e that calls it out as such. I guess your issue is with the 4th edition book then. Which is fair. I think the 4th ed's books are great, but I can see if someone was new to the game they would miss out on a lot of nuanced things. For the record. Using low skills is NOT the only way to lose honor. They should of course lose honor for using magic in court, they should lose honor for burning down a building (and be arrested by a magistrate too). That kind of stuff is intuition, and cannot be detailed in a core book! You cannot be spoon fed what does and doesn't lose you honor. Breaching etiquette should lose you both honor and glory. That is a fundamental thing. So there should be no guideline as to what is and is not a breach of etiquette? The published game makes a big deal about how "alien" the culture is, and then people insist that the game can't detail ANYTHING. Every time someone asks for the game to give more detail, we're told by someone else "the game can't give details, what a waste of space, you need to figure that out on your own!" Well yeah if you only look at the 4th edition they don't physically have room to put in every possible breach of etiquette. You can either research more online, read through the 20+ years of lore, just wing it, or go with only the things that are in the book. It's up to you how you want to play your RPG. Some people like more spoonfeeding than others, which I understand. The group I play with have always been quite liberal and off the cuff about things.
  24. The variation between the Z and the S is old enough (earliest useage circa 1760) that "f" was still being used for a long S in printed English documents on both sides of the Atlantic. The Z variant is the standard both in American spelling, and in "Oxford British" spelling at this point. The comparison with the very-recent loss of clarity with the decline of "one" in favor of the "general" you makes for some snarky rhetoric, and not much more. If I want "grammar tips", I'll go do my own research, thank you. So now using the actualy RPG, as printed, is a "crutch"... OK. No need to be so hostile
  25. As MaxKilljoy said, there ought to be Honor and/or Glory losses written into the system if doing that kind of thing really does mark the character as "a scumbag." But there aren't. Using magic in court isn't a Low skill; it might be a breach of etiquette, but I don't recall any discussion anywhere in 4e that calls it out as such. I guess your issue is with the 4th edition book then. Which is fair. I think the 4th ed's books are great, but I can see if someone was new to the game they would miss out on a lot of nuanced things. For the record. Using low skills is NOT the only way to lose honor. They should of course lose honor for using magic in court, they should lose honor for burning down a building (and be arrested by a magistrate too). That kind of stuff is intuition, and cannot be detailed in a core book! You cannot be spoon fed what does and doesn't lose you honor. Breaching etiquette should lose you both honor and glory. That is a fundamental thing. Edit - Had a look in the book, page 90 - Breach of Etiquette, it is subjective really whether or not it is major or minor. Depends on what was done imo.
×
×
  • Create New...