Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Crashw1re

    I'm confused about vassal families.

    Thanks for a the replies guys. Regarding facts within storytelling, I do understand what you mean. It can make for creative problems. And as long as numbers remian proportional it's okay. But actual facts can be very important from a story telling standpoint. When the players enter a village, who is the top dog? (as you say a peasant which I didn't know) If that village is under threat who can you talk to, who's responsibility is it. Do they have to go find some distant samurai? Or does he live outside the village? Fantasy should be grounded in its own internal logic, it should be a world that works and ticks along and then you throw in the characters and story. Especially in a role playing game, immersing yourself in the world is important. (Well with L5R I find it to be, Paranoia maybe not so much) Players are always asking for details, those details build the sense of actually being in a world as opposed to just whatever the GM makes up in the spot. Thank you Suzume that helps a lot envisaging what the society structure would look like. Which is what I was trying to get my head round. It sounds like what you are saying is that for the most part samurai dwell in towns and perform their roles in exchange for payment from their lord. Essentially like a job. It's not western feudalism in that the king owns all the land and gives it out to nobles to govern and then they in turn give it out kinghts or minor lords to govern smaller pieces. They each reap the revenues of that land but pay taxes to the lord above them. Correct me if I'm wrong but you are saying major families own the land, they keep that land, take the revenue and pay samurai to govern it? The core book says that each family has 3-5 vassals. Would those vassals be granted land by their ruling family? I presume all samurai would be found a job some where by their lord. Also finally I get there can be huge extended families and that many of these are not tightly connected despite sharing a name. And you included some very interesting information from history. I'm just curious now. Is everyone from these mega extended families. Are there mega families but also loads of other families as well? Are those families small or hugely extended as well. Thank you everyone.
  2. Crashw1re

    I'm confused about vassal families.

    Well firstly I'm interested in the structure of the houses/vassals/lords ect irrespective of how many peolple there actually are in each. I am interested in rough numbers of samurai. The number in each family could vary but my initial thoughts would not be to excessive amount So that makes me think I need to ask. What would be your estimates on how many people there are in each family. Secondly if there are hundreds of Doji's filling all the roles then are there even smaller families? Or is it literally just the named families and their vassals. It seems unlikely to me that there wouldn't be other families around.
  3. The rule book states that each main clan family has between 3-5 vassal families. That's all cool, but I'm wondering about other samurai families, because currently that doesn't add up to the supposed thousands of samurai in Rokugan. I'm sort of assuming that each family and vassal family also has multiple lords that manage small bits of their land. The local lord of the village sort of situation. Also what about all the samurai that serve as guards or in the court or in the bereaucracies. I've kinda got that in my head that each family and vassal family also had a varying number of retainer families that swear loyalty to them. These guys don't have land but have a place in whatever town they are in. Or a given room in a castle or palace by Thier lord. Does anyone have any idea what they actual structure of samurai life looks like? I'm very curious. Thank you.
  4. Crashw1re

    Are FFG treating its fans poorly?

    Ah thats alright then, that actually rekindles my interest in the game. I thought it would be similar to the core sets not having everything.
  5. I have noticed a lot of decisions recently that I think are not on and i'd like to know what other prople think. Also apologies if this has been posted somewhere else. I wasn't really sure where to post it. Now let me start by saying that ffg makes incredible games many of which I play and deeply enjoy; armada and x wing being two favourites. I think they've done a lot for games and are always innovating. That said the demo of Star Wars legion showing that the core box didnt even have enough dice for units in the game has peaked my concern. It was quite embarrasing watching them ask the players to remember their results and re roll the dice, this in a game that has re rolls. I know most of their games to really be functional you need two sets, but is this right? Bizarre little movement tools as well strike me as another way to sell peripherals, the tape measure has worked fine for a long time. And you could include something else if you wanted to limit turn rate on speeders ect. Worse I feel is the new clan packs for Legend of the Five Rings LCG. I was very excited to try and get stuck into a LCG and thought the game looked good, the art incredible. I was hoping to try and get into some local tournements. However, the fact that clanpacks will have three cards that only have one copy is in my opinion ridiculous. That to get these cards I would have to pay three times and have an excess of cards I can't use just seems like increadibly cold money grabbing to me. It has really put me off getting the game, because whilst I was prepared to pay to keep up with frequent releases, I can't jusify this. FFG make wonderful games but I feel we are being made to look like chumps. What do people think?