Awesome. Thank you. 

Awesome. Thank you. 

Here is the link to her online store:
 
https://www.inprnt.com/gallery/francescabaerald/

@FBaerald (Francesca Baerald) on Twitter is the artist responsible for all these awesome maps we’re getting in 5e. Her work is phenomenal. She has lower Rez versions of these maps on her Twitter, plus you can buy large scale canvas or cotton paper versions through an online store she uses, but that might just be the map of the empire and possibly the Shadowlands. I believe she also has a Deviant Art Account where you might find slightly higher rez images. 

Hello there
I made myself a cheat sheet to ease the use of honor gain/loss during play.

I share, feel free to comment 😃
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6wlfypi1b06tiub/the_tenets_of_bushido.pdf

How did we get to a place where the newest "Narrative System" is simultaneously the most complex, mechanically? The kind of system they've released in Beta is so closely mirrored of White Wolf's Storyteller System, and if you or anyone has ever played that, you can run that system after ten minutes of reading the rules.
Like I said, I don't want to be that guy who just complains, so I've been thinking of ways to resolve this issue and stay with the design philosophy FFG has planted their flag on.
1) Be more succinct and concise in your wording. I.e: Remove approaches and tell me in no uncertain terms what the Rings mean. Don't mince words. 
2) Right now the charts in the book are every-****-where, knock it off. Compile them into one section label it "Appendix A: Charts" and putt all the **** charts for all the **** ways to spend opportunity in one location. 
3) Simplify and speed up combat. Your fancy Wounds/Fatigue/Critical hit system is overly strenuous. Also, if you want to use unique Critical Hits, maybe try coming up with more than 12 of them 3-4 of which are the same just progressively worse. 

I've run previous editions of L5R, both in the past and recently, and yes, they are crunchy, to a degree, they also don't go around calling themselves a "Narrative System." Narrative systems are smooth, don't get in the way of the game, allow for rules arbitration to be done rapidly. 
 
But the larger problem here here is that you see the game as complex enough that a GM would need TWO Screens to run this game. I don't wanna own 1 screen let alone be nearly required to own two just to run the game. Doesn't that seem counterintuitive to the philosophy of narrative system? 

I don't know if I'm alone in this, I've poked around on here a good bit and not seen many people concerned about it...But my question: How much am I expected to memorize? Stems from a few things. 
• Approaches: 5 Skill Groups. 5 Rings. 5 (or more) skills. Is it reasonable to expect every GM or Player to remember all the different combinations or choices here? When is a "clever" mechanic just too burdensome? 
• Opportunity: Skill specific. Skill Group Specific. Ring Specific. Techniques (Kata, Shuji, Kiho, Invocations, Rituals). Combat Specific. I get it...But again, how in the **** is someone supposed to quickly and accurately adjudicate such a diverse set of options when there are so many to the point of being redundant? 
Now, I don't want to come off as a wet blanket here, I'm not opposed by any means to a new system for the game. The idea of bringing a narrative structure to dice mechanics and so on is admirable. But in other more narrative focused games it seems that the rules are designed to not impede play. Yet, through 10 hours of play, it still takes my 3 person group 10 minutes to figure out a single dice roll. And sure, that's largely due to unfamiliarity with the system, but it's also in large part everyone looking up all the different approaches, does this skill fit this task, how can I spend these opportunity points, how do I role play my Strife in this situation. And we haven't even gotten into combat yet. 
When you think of Samurai Fiction, you invariably think of flashing sword duels, and men being cut down rapidly. Take the first fight scene in Yojimbo as an example, Mifunes character dispatches 3 men in 3 strokes. If he were to do that with these rules, Yojimbo would be 37 hours long. A game about the romantic version Samurai should have a fast, seemless, and unobtrusive rules set. It shouldn't require me to consult a rule book or spread sheet with every dice roll. 

This I'm in agreement with. I actually prefer this version of Advantages & Disadvantages. I also like the idea of taking things that used to be specific skills and turning them into Passions. I think that part of the game works really well, especially given that you can turn an Adv or a Disadv into either or, depending on the situation. 
Something like Famously Honest is both a blessing and a curse. 1) No one believes you lie (as the advantage) but 2) everyone believes everything you say...everything (possible disadvantage). 

I have my issues with the Razor-Edged mechanics. It just seems like more stuff for my players to managed, that is uninteresting to them. They already have Strife, Approaches, to manage on a roll, then on top of that they have to watch out that the NPC/Oni doesn't reduce their damage to zero or their sword becomes worthless. 

You can hand-wave however you like.   Unless the rules or the GM explicitly state the target numbers in combat are hidden, then the rule stands as written, and you will inevitably have players figuring out what WHW did: that you can fail intentionally just because you didn't get the result you needed and avoid the negative outcome.  It's storygame nonsense to avoid the outcomes of dice mechanics.  Committing to rolling dice means an acceptance of randomized outcomes based on a calculated risk.  4th Edition had mechanics for this, represented by either a maneuver or raises, that would have (if 4E had had this Razor Edged trait) allowed a player with a katana to risk failure to look for opportunities to strike around the heavy armor if you were afraid of just hacking away.  This mechanic lets the player figure out what they want to do after the randomized outcome happens, which eliminates risk.  Did I do it? Awesome!  Did I not? Oh, well I never tried anyway.  Besides, if you're hiding target numbers from me, I'm going to use this rule to hit somebody with my spare sword to get a Void Point back, lol.
The game needs to decide what it is. Because right now it's just a crappy mechanical game with cumbersome storygame elements, and it's a crappy storygame with cumbersome dice mechanics.  Crunch gamers don't want to play this game because the mechanics are chores and often nonsensical, traditional roleplayers don't want to play this game because the roleplay mechanics are a hindrance and poorly considered. Only storygamers want to play this game.  If they want to make a storygame, that's fine. Go all the way on it and don't pretend it is using any of the heritage of previous mechanics, or of dice mechanics in general.  Just please reprint 4th Edition so my newer players can get hard copy books without paying through the nose on EBay.

That really just removes a layer of immersion from the game, by having one game mechanic inherently negate another one in such a patently silly way.  "Oh no, I'm going to hit his armor! Split-second diversion of my strike!"
Effectively there is no point to any weapons having Razor-Edged because it should never come into effect. Character Resistance is set prior to the roll (their SaE bonuses are already in play).  So the attacking character is fully aware of how many successes they need to avoid the effect. If they roll that many, they strike.  If they don't, they then intentionally miss.  That's so antithetical to roleplaying it's not even funny.

From my perspective, L5R has always been in tension between a narrative system and a gamist system. Sometimes it wants to be one; sometimes the other. 
I think 5E is slightly more narrative than previously (if you ignore the significant memorization burden for "what do I roll when.") See for example the narrative element of Advantages and Disadvantages.

So, I've been running a test game based on some older material and the group I'm running for isn't grasping the system well and truthfully, neither am I. 
But I remain undaunted and so I'm looking for a game to join. I figure maybe more exposure to the system would be beneficial. 
If anyone is looking to run the game either Ronin's Path or something else I'd be highly interested in joining a game. 

Carrying unworked fingers of jade, as well, can put you on that list. 

I've run previous editions of L5R, both in the past and recently, and yes, they are crunchy, to a degree, they also don't go around calling themselves a "Narrative System." Narrative systems are smooth, don't get in the way of the game, allow for rules arbitration to be done rapidly. 
 
But the larger problem here here is that you see the game as complex enough that a GM would need TWO Screens to run this game. I don't wanna own 1 screen let alone be nearly required to own two just to run the game. Doesn't that seem counterintuitive to the philosophy of narrative system? 

What need does a Samurai not if the Crab Clan have of such knowledge? Surely, one must consider ones own spirit before embarking on a quest for such knowledge. 
 
In previous editions of L5R, Lore: Shadowlands, wasn't a skill you flaunted, and spouting off about the Shadowlands could likely put you on a particular watch list of a particular family who very much enjoys face painting tutorials on YouTube. 
 
So, while I do agree it needs to be its own skill, I don't see anything wrong with how they've handled the "Lore" per se. If you're a Crab, you know some things. The rest of what said Crab or any other PC may come to understand should be handled through the game and not represented by a catch all skill. 

I mean, you need to know everything that's reasonable or you're going to make poor choices. Not understanding the different weighting of criticals on minions vs adversaries or understanding that you don't need to counter play minion stance opportunities will cause problems. I didn't say it was a gazillion rules, but every additional exception and every type that doesn't play by the rules adds to the overhead.

to answer your question, I'd say : as a GM you are expected to remember all the rules in general, and most of the detail by heart.
Now I know it's not an easy task, and you may not have the luxury to spent much time on rules for an RPG (I can understand that, for a job plus familly life takes time too - and are more important than RPG of course - ).
But L5R was never ment to be simple to play, and the other editions were quite ''heavy'' when it came to rules anyway.
Now that said, I don't think you should worry much about the approach rules : it is quite intuitive once you understand the philosophical meaning of all the elements. as for the list of all the skills, it will be like the other RPG you master : you end nowing them by heart by using them.
 
Your post raise a good point though : a GM for L5R will obviously need a screen, and I have a proposal about that : We will need 2 screens : one for starting GMs, containing all the informations you need to consult all the time, and one for the more experienced GM, who will no longer need those informations (becaus they know them by heart) but will need a quick access to more exceptionnal points of rules.

That’s not a matter of having a gazillion different mechanical options to memorize though. Also, how much do you really need to know about these? Minions are simplified and weak NPCs, Adversaries are NPCs with mostly the same kind of workup as PCs. That’s really all my players would need to know about them.

My character can't make reasonable decisions if he doesn't understand his opponents, which means knowing minion, adversary, and other rules.

It is a bit complex for my tastes too, yes. That said, this is mostly so for the GM. Combat can be convoluted for the players too, but assuming they are familiar with their own character and the Strife system it’s not too bad. The other stuff is mainly complicated if the players are trying to game the system and/or make decisions “by committee”. Just tell the GM what your character is going to do and let the GM translate that to mechanics. I really advise GMs to have exhaustive cheat sheets to consult while running a game in this edition though.

Eh. I’ve played through and GMed quite a few adventures (the official Shadowlands modules from 1st ed come to mind, and definitely Mirror, mirror)  that took the PCs - not all of them Crab - through the Shadowlands. If they were sensible they prepared for it, and even if they didn’t the trip itself (for those that came back) certainly was educational.   That by itself could be knowledge handled through the game, but it’s also a plausible reason for those PCs to study up on the Shadowlands and have access to Crab resources to do so. It may not often be needed, but it’s a fair question to ask.

I don't know if I'm alone in this, I've poked around on here a good bit and not seen many people concerned about it...But my question: How much am I expected to memorize? Stems from a few things. 
• Approaches: 5 Skill Groups. 5 Rings. 5 (or more) skills. Is it reasonable to expect every GM or Player to remember all the different combinations or choices here? When is a "clever" mechanic just too burdensome? 
• Opportunity: Skill specific. Skill Group Specific. Ring Specific. Techniques (Kata, Shuji, Kiho, Invocations, Rituals). Combat Specific. I get it...But again, how in the **** is someone supposed to quickly and accurately adjudicate such a diverse set of options when there are so many to the point of being redundant? 
Now, I don't want to come off as a wet blanket here, I'm not opposed by any means to a new system for the game. The idea of bringing a narrative structure to dice mechanics and so on is admirable. But in other more narrative focused games it seems that the rules are designed to not impede play. Yet, through 10 hours of play, it still takes my 3 person group 10 minutes to figure out a single dice roll. And sure, that's largely due to unfamiliarity with the system, but it's also in large part everyone looking up all the different approaches, does this skill fit this task, how can I spend these opportunity points, how do I role play my Strife in this situation. And we haven't even gotten into combat yet. 
When you think of Samurai Fiction, you invariably think of flashing sword duels, and men being cut down rapidly. Take the first fight scene in Yojimbo as an example, Mifunes character dispatches 3 men in 3 strokes. If he were to do that with these rules, Yojimbo would be 37 hours long. A game about the romantic version Samurai should have a fast, seemless, and unobtrusive rules set. It shouldn't require me to consult a rule book or spread sheet with every dice roll. 

"It is bad when one thing becomes two. One should not look for anything else in the Way of the Samurai."
                                      -Yamamoto Tsunetomo, Hagakure
Monday night, I ran a playtest of the L5R beta test rules. I've played or run every edition of L5R, and I'm going to say it's my favorite RPG. I really wanted these rules to be good. I'm even okay with FFG's funny dice, but these rules are problematic. They seem unattached to a simulating a physical reality, and are the most complex ruleset I think I've ever attempted to run.  
I say that with some hesitation, as I like the folks over at FFG, and I want them to succeed in this, but by gum, there are a number of deep and abiding issues with the rules.
For example, skill rolls. Skills have been around since RuneQuest, and there are a number of clever simple skill systems around. But in FFG L5R, to make a skill roll there are likely charts you must consult, and the GM has to make a ruling on it. In this ruleset, you roll your skill plus your Ring (Air, Earth, Fire, Water, or Void) and keep a number of dice equal to your ring. Sounds simple, right?
Figuring out how to climb a hut took 10 minutes.
Why was this so hard?
First, there was no skill that easily applied itself to climbing. No Athletics, no Climbing, etc. Secondly, the Rings are not intuitive or concrete.  Is climbing a wall by relying on the cracks a water ring roll or an air ring roll? In other systems, I could revert to Strength or Agility depending on the "approach", but because L5R's core attributes are unmoored from physical reality, we were left adrift. 
The missing skill, okay, that could just be a lacuna in the beta. But the abstract nature of the rings, plus the fact that the GM has to rule on the ring for every single roll makes checks vague and burdensome. Also, it's a thing players can argue about. In the 21st century, I am looking for games that move work away from the GM, not on to her back. 
Combat is equally cumbersome. In the first round of combat, there are seven, I counted, SEVEN STEPS to figuring out who hit, and how much damage they did. Admittedly, three of those steps only take place on the first round of combat, or on the round an NPC is struck down, but given that short combats are more common than long, it is another burden placed between a group and enjoyment. 
To show you what I mean, the steps are: 
Assessment: This is a roll to figure out things about your opponent or your situation. There are a number of issues with this mechanic. First, the check is different depending on whether or not you are in a duel, skirmish, mass combat, or social scene. The roll varies again depending on which Ring you use to make the check. Lastly, this is a core mechanic of all conflicts in the game which, near as I can tell, is meant to simulate looking your opponent up and down before fighting. It is incredibly complex, and is meant to simulate something incredibly simple. Again, looking at how other games handle this is illustrative. There would be a Notice roll, and the GM would tell the player what they notice. Compare that simplicity to a) remembering what to roll based on the 4 types of conflict, b) remembering what is produced depending on which fo the 5 rings is used. This ruleset is too complex!   Initiative Combat proper begins Set stance: Character has to take one of five stances, again based on one of the five rings. I would point out that literally, this means the GM needs to remember 15 data points before we even figure out who has hit in L5R beta combat. The stances aren't bad, but after the complexity of assessment it is simply stacking more complexity on this system to add stances.  Perform Action: Depending on what a character wants to do, there are mini-systems to follow. There are seven mini-systems here for a "skirmish", and they aren't individually problematic, but they mean we are now at 21 data points for a single action in a skirmish. (I would add that this is not counting fact that a number of these mini systems have unique rewards for rolling 2 opportunities, which again adds complexity and slows down the table.) If the player chooses Strike, and gets 2 successes, they hit. Target takes Wounds. (This step only happens when a PC or foe is dropped.) If Wounds exceed Resilience, a critical strike is incurred. The character is essentially out of combat, and a table is consulted to see what terrible things happen to them.  In summary, to hit and resolve once in the first round of combat, if the hit defeated the foe, there would be 7 steps and 25 data points involved. 
Let's compare that to GUMSHOE briefly. In GUMSHOE, in the first round of combat, there are three steps (Initiative, roll to hit, apply damage) and 4 data points (The target number, the bonus to the player's roll, the damage value, and the NPC's Health.) 
In the 21st century, there have been so many innovations to gaming that solve problems like the complexity of combat, etc. But L5R seems to ignore them, and run with a design philosophy that more is more.  
The game seems to ignore all indie game innovations that makes games easier to run. It is especially hard on the GM. Tracking damage is a chore, NPC management is a chore, etc. In a world where 13th Age and Dungeon World exist to show us how to make combat fast and fun with NPCs that are a breeze,
It pains me to say it, but this is the most disturbing thing about the ruleset to me. It takes long-standing solutions to problems in RPG design and rolls them backward. Since Gygax and Arneson, people have used physical attribute stats at the table, and they've worked. The use of skills has been a problem solved in interesting and creative ways in countless dozens of games. This ruleset takes these established solutions and rolls them backwards. The use of rings instead of attributes makes play harder, not easier or more fun.  
An Apology: Cruel to be kind
Lastly, I want to say I know good and smart people are working on this. I love FFG games, and I deeply love L5R. Like I said, it's my favorite game. But this ruleset establishes problems for play at the table. Therefore, I believe if released in its current form, it will not produce the L5R renaissance I was hoping for when I heard FFG acquired the IP. 

Those are my two cents, and I hope the game is simpler, and better, when finally released.