Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Avatar111

  1. There is so much tactical cheese that you can do with techniques and opportunities that it becomes a "gamey" theatre of the mind. Sure if your players are not really aware of all the rules and details it can EASILY be skipped (for the best).
  2. straight up one of the biggest conceptual problem with the design. it depends on the GM too much. "hard counters" as I call them.
  3. It is just boring. A pack of minions in earth stance is "boring". So are big enemies in earth stance. BORING. Sure, maybe a player have the technique to debug earth stance. And that is all good. But as a design ? something that binary ? I really think it is a mistake. Again, not because of its power level (This game is out of whack anyway and it really doesn't matter), but because it is BORING.
  4. Earth Stance is not too strong, it is too boring and badly designed. Big difference.
  5. "And since L5R5 clearly isn't trying to be that" Hmm.. hard to say... Feels like it is trying to be everything at once.
  6. like a wise legend once said: "Everybody plays this game differently, and I mean it."
  7. Nothing is broken when everything is. Everybody plays this game differently, and I mean it. Just enjoy the game, do cool stories.
  8. Start by asking your questions. If they are setting/lore questions, I am pretty sure it'll be a pretty awesome discussion. If it is rules questions, then it is probably bound to be very heated because most of the time there are no "right" answers and it is strictly depending on how your group plays the game. And most of the time, it all goes back to the same answer; the rules are finicky and depend on interpretation. The subforum about "Lore Discussion" is where you want to have your cool discussions about Rokugan. It seems the right place for the questions you are about to ask.
  9. And that is what L5R RPG is all about. Hard counter the cheese with cheesier cheese! Make then unable to use their abilities! "Oh you want to challenge the big NPC with your shield and bragging that your combat style is better?" "OK! My big NPC have a technique to make you drop your shield! Or, he wins a social check and make you fight without the shield!" MUHAHAHA
  10. Yup, that is basically how to handle it. Using the setting and changing the situations. It still feels like major crutch most of the time though, and is not really friendly to new players. But yes; using the setting, being a good GM that likes to put that extra work in, and having good players that are not looking at breaking rules can make it work. Basically, the rules are making it harder, they are an hindrance, instead of facilitating different playstyles. All your ideas is what I am doing to deal with, well, stuff that can break certain types of encounters. Basically, not using those encounters (or only as push overs) and designing situations in which the players cannot use their tools (or at great cost, honor, status or else). I do not think it is good design (far from it!) but that doesn't mean it is unplayable.... It just is, very finicky.
  11. For whatever reason the qamarist shield only requires a movement action to use the ability, while other shields require other types of actions, I think. Its just so all over the place. It definitely is very strong. But beyond "strong" ... (which is something that happens in most rpg with ton of gear and without the design quality of d&d), the issue is one of gameplay. The rock/paper/scissor gameplay of L5R is problematic on many levels. There are many techniques, stance, opportunities, gear or what not that create a hard situation for the GM in which you have to compensate for all that cheese by throwing cheese yourself; "allright, my player have a sacred weapon, well, I can't put ghost now because they become irrelevant and easy to beat". Or, "oh, my player have Bind The Shadows, so I cannot really put otherwordly creatures that fight in this or that stance otherwise they immobilize them for the whole scene, or a full year. Or, "oh, my big crab player have a laquered armor and fight in earth stance? I guess I cannot really put him against this or that npc because they will have no chance to do anything... Ok, I'll give them this technique to counter the player..." The more you play (and at higher ranks) the more you "feel" these problems with the design. It is so mechanically swingy and binary that it becomes tedious for the GM to deal with all that, and it feels very cheap for the players when the GM come up with a bad excuse to "nerf" or "counter" one of the PC capability that is screwing up with tons of encounter possibilities. Anyway, it is what it is.. both l5r rpg and lcg are wonky designs. I guess you need to overlook that a bit and enjoy the setting/art.
  12. Because the player will always have the qamarist shield. So in every encounter you will face the issue of having to deal with it. To deal with it, you need to add techniques to your npc, or use cheese, or whatever. Lets say this character goes out there and start challenging others to duels. But he stick to his water ring and just attack and heal strife. Now, you, as a GM, needs to find a way to "beat that cheese". And I can guarantee you it will feel forced and not fun for the player. The "shield" is only one example. There are so many totally busted designs in the game that as a GM you have to do gymnastic all the time. For sure, those problems are not really apparent when you play mostly narrative and all players agree on some sort of honor code. But that really doesn't excuse the weakness ands flaws of the design. You cannot call this "good design". You can maybe say "there are ways to deal with it as a GM". But thats about it.
  13. Your way of thinking about it is exactly why the game is badly designed. You have a player that have that qamarist shield. As a GM, you have to find ways to play around it, or add a technique from your "list", to beat it, in EVERY encounters you do or NPC you have. The shield becomes a crutch. And everytime the player will feel like "ok, what is the GM coming up with to counter my shield this time". This is awful gameplay. Like straight up garbage design. Does it matter? Bah, no, you can always "deal with it". But to call it good design is laughable. This game is a turd in so many aspects. Doesn't mean it can't be played... There is a GM to compensate after all.
  14. Your group needs to interpret and define how far you want to bring wards. According to the book I think it is mostly just an example with rules that are guidelines. The GM and the players can define how they want wards to work in an extended fashion. If all your group is on the same page I am certain you can come to an agreement that makes it fun for everybody, and more importantly, fun for the story. Edit: personally, since I (gm) manage time, scenes, and downtimes very strictly, we allow everything to work (since it takes a downtime to create). But, your mileage may vary. I suggest you let the GM decide and hopefully they decide with a fair and fun judgement.
  15. I can take the blame. I complained way too much, and still do. But I toned downed a bit if you check around the last few weeks. You are right that I should have just walked away instead of voicing my opinion over and over. Nothing will change with the game. Even if I was right, what would it change? Nothing. That is basically like a madman that keeps hammering complaints about any situation or product (political, or corporate, or whatever else) over and over, nothing will change. At least not in the short/medium term. I'll keep making efforts to tone down plastering my critical opinion everywhere, especially not in threads that do not deserve it, which right now is mostly the general section as I am not really taking part in the lore and story sections. I'll limit those opinions to the rules and houserules sections which are more appropriate for such opinions and discussions. Hopefully you see improvements and your experience with the forums improve!
  16. I think it is only english subtitle. My Country is much better than Kingdoms though! I like subtiles too, something soothing about it all. Maybe because I have been watching many international movies with subtitles for the most part of my life. And I'm kind of old
  17. Not only relevant to RPG, although they are discussed, briefly. Here is an Interview with the president of Asmodee USA talking about the recent shuffles at FFG. Basically, FFG will do a lot of miniatures games (and star wars) focused, while still keeping card games and a sprinkle of what they made their name with; narrative board games. RPG will continue and a lot of the freelancers will come back. It really all depends what are the budgets and skills (and commitment) of the new Edge studio.
  18. Definitely. Fix the core (and screen?) the other books can probably just get a few erratas.
  19. Your GM sounds like how I play... I do the same even with Narrative Scenes; I set a timer with a set amount of rolls (more or less, sometimes I throw in an extra round or two, depending). Agreed it is written/edited super confusingly (the Conflict chapter especially is just a headscratcher...) and some techniques and abilities or opportunity usage are a bit busted or overlap with other options. The game is confused and lacks polish, hard to deny, but if the GM can navigate through the hoops and find their own rythm in there, and that the players are cooperative, it can work to tell interesting stories. They won't do a revised/patched edition anytime soon... I'm pretty sure they won't... Especially now that many books are out, it would be too difficult and too costly of an eadeavor.
  20. Not necessarily. You can have a "timer" like what they do in Winter's Embrace. The NPCs doesn't need to make a roll at all. But for a simple "convincing" (very binary outcome) I do agree a full Intrigue scene is not necessary. Intrigues are a really, REALLY weird beast to tackle. There are so many ways to use them.. hey kind of work the best as a full on PC vs NPC if you setup a huge encounter, with multiple NPCs and locations, and have the PCs not be all in the same spot and also have different agendas. But this is extremely difficult to setup as a GM. And usually is the whole session in itself (more of less). With a "timer" they can work in more situations, and are easier to setup, but, if the goal is very binary they tend to make all the party focus fire on just getting momentum points and not really caring for all the shuji and stuff. The best way is to do like in Winter's Embrace, basically different outcomes are possible and the Intrigue itself is not a simple matter of "party trying to convince someone", but more like the PCs trying to navigate a social situation in whatever way they feel they want to. Still, all the defensive Shuji are kind of useless for those scenes in which the NPC don't "attack". I mean.. It is so all over the place. So complicated to figure out on the spot. That yes, most of the time you just do a simple TN check, and add your "opportunity usage shuji" and call it a day.
  21. I think we play similarly to you. Separate momentum tracks. 3pc vs 1npc is still easy win, 2pc help/assist 1pc who is the one "leading" the conversation (usually the courtier). But a shared momentum track is just ridiculous. I think. Also, I do "attack" with the NPC, and if one NPC "win" well, the targeted PC will be forced to be "persuaded". Which makes it interesting for us. So in the case of the Treasure hunter... well the NPC would simply target another PC. Sure, the treasure hunter is immune... (and it is so-so design) but at least not all the party is. Or I would be nasty, and use all my NPC with high Fire and Strife dumping abilities and compromise the Treasure hunter (which is how L5R plays at higher rank, cheese vs cheese).
  22. Oh, it is busted. No doubt... But so many things are. It just gets really hard to start to balance everything in this game. Also, who knows if Intrigues require the NPC to "attack" the PC. It doesn't say so anywhere, nor there are example of that anywhere... I do play as is (because, we like it?) But clearly, the game never mentions anything about it. All the intrigues examples are more like the PCs have 2-3 rounds to gain enough momentum to win. But when you start to check all the Shuji in relation to the intrigue rules... Some stuff really doesn't make sense. It really is as if the system doesn't know how it should be played. Or at the very least, it really ain't clearly written. Anyway, maybe the designers never intended the PCs to be the targets of NPC during intrigues? Who knows...
  23. I think I understand their concern because I share it. I like to play intrigue scenes with NPCs that are actively trying to win, ie: they make rolls to persuade the PC etc. (But then again, who knows how intrigue should really be played. Timer? Momentum track per PC or for the whole party? The game just doesn't say. Then if all of a sudden you have a PC who have like 7 vigilance, they become a bit immune to the whole "systems" of intrigues (among other immunities). Sure, there are ways around it (compromise them?) But that falls into what I was talking earlier; hard counters gameplay. Though, the game is like that. You will have players that are straight up immune or overpowered in some wide areas. And you, as a GM, will have to come up with the right tools to "counter" them. Is it by design? Or just simply a by-product of bad design? The story doesn't say. But the result is the same. If you start as a GM to fear that your players will "break" the game, you are not doing it right. L5R requires the GM to custom tweak the adventures and adversaries to be able to deal with the players. A "generic" answer doesn't work here like it usually does in most standard adventure ttrpg.
  • Create New...