The Agasha used to have a more distinct identity. In particular, they were part of a samurai/shugenja theme that the Dragon originally had, where the Mirumoto and Agasha would work together far more than shugenja usually would with a Clan's bushi (this also influenced the Mirumoto, which you still see in things like an RPG technique to increase or decrease spell TNs).

But ... the Agasha aren't there anymore, of course. More importantly, at some point they shifted the mechanical depiction of samurai/shugenja synergy over to the Phoenix in the CCG. And what is being done in the CCG heavily drives what's getting depicted in the story. So that aspect faded from the Dragon. The Tamori are, for the most part, basically just defined by being aggressive and militant (they could be defined by the potion thing, but that has never been depicted meaningfully in the CCG so, again, that doesn't take root much).

The Asako have the monk order and the loremaster which makes them interesting.

When I think about it I can see them joining the Togashi order.

"Follow a codified set of steps to overcome human limitations through supernatural means" and "seek your own path to enlightenment, helped along by an infusion of divine power from outside" strike me as VERY different.

If anything, the Henshin have more in common, at the basic mechanical level,with the "no, really, Taint is a crutch" Order of the Spider.

The Asako have the monk order and the loremaster which makes them interesting.

When I think about it I can see them joining the Togashi order.

"Follow a codified set of steps to overcome human limitations through supernatural means" and "seek your own path to enlightenment, helped along by an infusion of divine power from outside" strike me as VERY different.

If anything, the Henshin have more in common, at the basic mechanical level,with the "no, really, Taint is a crutch" Order of the Spider.

Gunichi has a point here. At the same time, I'm now scared of the idea of a Spider Henshin.

The henshin border on irrelevant (or, I would argue, just are irrelevant) when we're talking about broad themes and what defines the Clans.

The henshin border on irrelevant (or, I would argue, just are irrelevant) when we're talking about broad themes and what defines the Clans.

Eh, they're the root of the specific animosity between the Asako and the Isawa, the secret the Asako won't share. So in terms of the Phoenix clan's fractious internal relations, they're important to have around.

In no way should they be a defining feature of Phoneix decks (assuming there are Phoenix decks)a the LCG launches, but suggesting they'd fit under the Togashi umbrella is a bit much.

The henshin border on irrelevant (or, I would argue, just are irrelevant) when we're talking about broad themes and what defines the Clans.

Eh, they're the root of the specific animosity between the Asako and the Isawa, the secret the Asako won't share. So in terms of the Phoenix clan's fractious internal relations, they're important to have around.

In no way should they be a defining feature of Phoneix decks (assuming there are Phoenix decks)a the LCG launches, but suggesting they'd fit under the Togashi umbrella is a bit much.

I'm talking relaunch, so the henshin aren't the root of anything unless we decide to make them exist and then make them the root of something.

If they are the same Clan, then Shiba doesn't kneel to Togashi -- Shiba and Togashi are no longer two different people. Maybe Togashi kneels to Isawa because Togashi realizes his quest for mystic enlightenment makes him really bad at being a leader in the here and now!

Yeah well... you see... I'm a Scorpion fan and I wouldn't like such a merge in the least. Because it touches exactly on one of the problems with retconning - the L5R Clan history is so intertwined that you can't just mess with one without messing with all.

1) if you're making Shiba and Togashi one, who wrote the Tao and who left to meditate and fast?

2) If Shiba and Togashi are one, you have a weird as hell situation with Bayushi's brother (Shiba) and the Kami that married a Scorpion (Togashi) to give birth to a half-dragon (Togashi Hoshi). Likewise, the weird alliance between Scorpion and Dragon would be even weirder - possibly impossible.

3) If 'Togashiba' was humbled before the Isawa, it makes little sense for Shoju to seek advice from him, before the Coup. Shoju would see him as weak (the Scorpion Champion knew of Togashi's secret), and wouldn't seek the advice of a weak Kami that bent his knee to a mortal.

etc...

So as you see.... messing with long-estabilished things isn't a wise path to take. And this is just in regards to the Scorpion: if we start checking Dragon/Phoenix relations and history with the other Clans, we will get a true laundry list of issues and problems that the game really doesn't need - it's more important to SOLVE current and existing problems, than to create new ones.

I think actually merging or removing clans from the setting would be the epitome of horrible.

Delaying the release of this or that clan from the base set to a later expansion is one thing. Altogether removing this or that clan kills a huge part of the setting. Given that the setting is in fact what FFG paid for, I think the idea of removing any of the great clans is...likely not going to happen. I also feel it's a pretty horrible idea on the whole.

Refocusing on the roles of shugenja as priests of the kami would probably do a load of good to the Phoenix. They're the bridge between Rokugan and the spirit realms, charged with identifying spiritual and Spirit issues and resolving them. Local clan shugenja do it too, to a (smaller) extent, but any heavy lifting that needs done, it's the Phoenix's job to do it. THEY explain the anger of the kami and the wrath of the fortunes to Rokugan. THEY speak to the fortunes on behalf of the Empire.

Much better than being miscast as stereotypical wizards who hurl fire at problems until they go away.

Yeah well... you see... I'm a Scorpion fan and I wouldn't like such a merge in the least. Because it touches exactly on one of the problems with retconning - the L5R Clan history is so intertwined that you can't just mess with one without messing with all.

I think they *are* all going to be messed with for FFG to make the best game it can. It's not like they're going to look at the game and say, "Well, we need to do something about Spider (or whomever), but let's not touch the other Clans."

They're going to look at the game and setting and say, "Okay, what needs fixing?"

Merging clans would bring the rabble rousers and jimmy rustlers out of the woodwork. A staged release is one thing, cutting is another, but merging? The day after that announcement there would literally be a page of threads with titles like "Why I won't play Crabion" and "Scorponix - Worst Idea Ever?" or "Crantis Isn't for Me".

They aren't going to retain everyone who currently plays or draw in everyone who used to play, but doing things like that would ensure that they do neither.

Yeah well... you see... I'm a Scorpion fan and I wouldn't like such a merge in the least. Because it touches exactly on one of the problems with retconning - the L5R Clan history is so intertwined that you can't just mess with one without messing with all.

I think they *are* all going to be messed with for FFG to make the best game it can. It's not like they're going to look at the game and say, "Well, we need to do something about Spider (or whomever), but let's not touch the other Clans."

They're going to look at the game and setting and say, "Okay, what needs fixing?"

Yes, but that's something different than stating "let's check all of the lore and history of the setting... 1200 fictional years of it... and start messing with it!"

I agree that current problems need fixing. I disagree that the solution to that involves messing around with ALL of the game's setting and lore. You don't use a bazooka to kill a housefly... you just grab a fly swatter.

You don't use a bazooka to kill a housefly... you just grab a fly swatter.

No, but if you have an infestation, you fumigate.

Yeah well... you see... I'm a Scorpion fan and I wouldn't like such a merge in the least. Because it touches exactly on one of the problems with retconning - the L5R Clan history is so intertwined that you can't just mess with one without messing with all.

I think they *are* all going to be messed with for FFG to make the best game it can. It's not like they're going to look at the game and say, "Well, we need to do something about Spider (or whomever), but let's not touch the other Clans."

They're going to look at the game and setting and say, "Okay, what needs fixing?"

Tinkering? Sure. Refocusing? Absolutely. Scrapping and rewriting? No thanks.

You don't use a bazooka to kill a housefly... you just grab a fly swatter.

No, but if you have an infestation, you fumigate.

lol.... btw, you just made me remember this:

Tinkering? Sure. Refocusing? Absolutely. Scrapping and rewriting? No thanks.

It's only a difference of degree, to me. Everyone will have a different line, and even a different definition of what constitutes tinkering vs. rewriting, and refocusing vs. scrapping.

Tinkering? Sure. Refocusing? Absolutely. Scrapping and rewriting? No thanks.

It's only a difference of degree, to me. Everyone will have a different line, and even a different definition of what constitutes tinkering vs. rewriting, and refocusing vs. scrapping.

When you have a 20 year old IP that you're rebooting it's important to take a look at the things that made people fall in love with that IP in the first place and recapture as many as you can. If you do this well, you end up with a product that appeals to old fans and draws new ones in. If you do this poorly you wind up with Jar Jar Binks and monologues on midichlorians.

Tinkering? Sure. Refocusing? Absolutely. Scrapping and rewriting? No thanks.

It's only a difference of degree, to me. Everyone will have a different line, and even a different definition of what constitutes tinkering vs. rewriting, and refocusing vs. scrapping.

When you have a 20 year old IP that you're rebooting it's important to take a look at the things that made people fall in love with that IP in the first place and recapture as many as you can. If you do this well, you end up with a product that appeals to old fans and draws new ones in. If you do this poorly you wind up with Jar Jar Binks and monologues on midichlorians.

Star Wars is a bad comparison. It made and makes ridiculous amounts of money, including the so-called "bad" prequels. Those movies were for children, and that's the market they capture. Adults who love the original trilogy still have it.

L5R is not classic Star Wars. It's a faltering game with a dwindling fan base. But like Star Wars, the new material should be targeted at capturing a new audience. Should the old audience be completely written off? No. Hopefully the new material appeals to them as well, and I agree one should carefully consider what made people fall in love with the setting to begin with.

But that doesn't mean slavishly adhering to continuity. Arguably, the new Star Wars movies are an attempt to appeal to the fans and tone and feel of the original. The first thing Disney did when it got the IP? Scrapped the Expanded Universe. They're now free to incorporate EU material they wish, without fear of contradicting old EU material and creating continuity conflict, because where there's a conflict, the new continuity rules.

Now it's a lot easier to draw a line and say, "These 6 movies are canon, but everything else isn't," than sorting through 20 years of primary source material that lacks a clear "second tier" of canon (although I suppose you could say this of Disk Wars), but nonetheless I think it's important for the long term health of FFG's game that such a determination be made. And it can't be, "All 20 years are canon, and you have to take the garbage with the gold," or this game is going to bomb.

The first thing Disney did when it got the IP? Scrapped the Expanded Universe. They're now free to incorporate EU material they wish, without fear of contradicting old EU material and creating continuity conflict, because where there's a conflict, the new continuity rules.

Now it's a lot easier to draw a line and say, "These 6 movies are canon, but everything else isn't," than sorting through 20 years of primary source material that lacks a clear "second tier" of canon (although I suppose you could say this of Disk Wars), but nonetheless I think it's important for the long term health of FFG's game that such a determination be made. And it can't be, "All 20 years are canon, and you have to take the garbage with the gold," or this game is going to bomb.

It's worth noting that it is a lot easier (and painless) to discard things that happened in the future of the franchise (hence why it was called 'Expanded Universe'), than to scrap or alter events that happened in its past. There was a fair bit of discontent at the scrapping, but if they had decided to reboot from Episode IV? Boy, the hordes of fanboys would tear down Disneyworld.

It's worth noting that it is a lot easier (and painless) to discard things that happened in the future of the franchise (hence why it was called 'Expanded Universe'), than to scrap or alter events that happened in its past. There was a fair bit of discontent at the scrapping, but if they had decided to reboot from Episode IV? Boy, the hordes of fanboys would tear down Disneyworld.

There was tons of material that took place in and around the original trilogy, as well as long before it. That's kind of my point.

Now, have they outright contradicted that material yet? I have no idea. But I guarantee that JJ Abrams is just making the best movie he can and ignoring all that "history."

Which, arguably, he would (and probably should) do regardless of whether Disney formally announced that they were scrapping the EU.

Tinkering? Sure. Refocusing? Absolutely. Scrapping and rewriting? No thanks.

It's only a difference of degree, to me. Everyone will have a different line, and even a different definition of what constitutes tinkering vs. rewriting, and refocusing vs. scrapping.

When you have a 20 year old IP that you're rebooting it's important to take a look at the things that made people fall in love with that IP in the first place and recapture as many as you can. If you do this well, you end up with a product that appeals to old fans and draws new ones in. If you do this poorly you wind up with Jar Jar Binks and monologues on midichlorians.

Star Wars is a bad comparison. It made and makes ridiculous amounts of money, including the so-called "bad" prequels. Those movies were for children, and that's the market they capture. Adults who love the original trilogy still have it.

L5R is not classic Star Wars. It's a faltering game with a dwindling fan base. But like Star Wars, the new material should be targeted at capturing a new audience. Should the old audience be completely written off? No. Hopefully the new material appeals to them as well, and I agree one should carefully consider what made people fall in love with the setting to begin with.

But that doesn't mean slavishly adhering to continuity. Arguably, the new Star Wars movies are an attempt to appeal to the fans and tone and feel of the original. The first thing Disney did when it got the IP? Scrapped the Expanded Universe. They're now free to incorporate EU material they wish, without fear of contradicting old EU material and creating continuity conflict, because where there's a conflict, the new continuity rules.

Now it's a lot easier to draw a line and say, "These 6 movies are canon, but everything else isn't," than sorting through 20 years of primary source material that lacks a clear "second tier" of canon (although I suppose you could say this of Disk Wars), but nonetheless I think it's important for the long term health of FFG's game that such a determination be made. And it can't be, "All 20 years are canon, and you have to take the garbage with the gold," or this game is going to bomb.

Ok, if you don't think the Star Wars prequels were a good example consider the Hobbit movies vs the Lord of the Rings films or the remade Clash of the Titans vs the old one. There are tons of possible examples. I picked that one because it's one that everyone recognizes.

I don't think most of us are advocating rehashing 20 years of the story - in fact most of us are advocating for the opposite, refocus, reforge, drive on. The clan identities are one of the things that most fans of the game feel is core to the brand. I really don't get your argument that they aren't.

What about the Marvel movies? Marvel comics have decades of continuity that lock out older fans, the movies ignore them and focus on what attracted people. They don't make the mistake of assuming that if they change anything ever at all, the result will not be "what people liked". And they are wildly successful, among existing Marvel fans, and among people who never read comic books.

Which is good, because comic books are absolutely moribund right now. Just like L5R was right before the sale.

Ok, if you don't think the Star Wars prequels were a good example consider the Hobbit movies vs the Lord of the Rings films or the remade Clash of the Titans vs the old one. There are tons of possible examples. I picked that one because it's one that everyone recognizes.

I don't think most of us are advocating rehashing 20 years of the story - in fact most of us are advocating for the opposite, refocus, reforge, drive one. The clan identities are one of the things that most fans of the game feel is core to the brand. I really don't get your argument that they aren't.

Lord of the Rings made a lot of smart changes for the first trilogy of films, that made them better films than they would have otherwise been. The Hobbit trilogy were simply bad films, or at least the first one was, regardless of their relationship to the books.

Clash of the Titans is based on an "IP" that is, uh, somewhat older than L5R.

You can mess with and even rewrite clan identities to make them and the world better and more consistent without touching their cores. And frankly, many people probably disagree on what constitutes "the core" of each clan, anyway, not least because they've all shifted and changed over 20 years.

I never said the clans weren't important. But nor should they, or their histories, be inviolate for their own sake.

All we know is that things are going to change. I think the difference between recofusing and rewriting (or retconning) and the importance of some inviolable continuity is being hugely overemphasized over FFG making the best game they can, as well as the best setting from which to launch more games, and even novels, come to that.

Ok, if you don't think the Star Wars prequels were a good example consider the Hobbit movies vs the Lord of the Rings films or the remade Clash of the Titans vs the old one. There are tons of possible examples. I picked that one because it's one that everyone recognizes.

I don't think most of us are advocating rehashing 20 years of the story - in fact most of us are advocating for the opposite, refocus, reforge, drive one. The clan identities are one of the things that most fans of the game feel is core to the brand. I really don't get your argument that they aren't.

Lord of the Rings made a lot of smart changes for the first trilogy of films, that made them better films than they would have otherwise been. The Hobbit trilogy were simply bad films, or at least the first one was, regardless of their relationship to the books.

Clash of the Titans is based on an "IP" that is, uh, somewhat older than L5R.

You can mess with and even rewrite clan identities to make them and the world better and more consistent without touching their cores. And frankly, many people probably disagree on what constitutes "the core" of each clan, anyway, not least because they've all shifted and changed over 20 years.

I never said the clans weren't important. But nor should they, or their histories, be inviolate for their own sake.

All we know is that things are going to change. I think the difference between recofusing and rewriting (or retconning) and the importance of some inviolable continuity is being hugely overemphasized over FFG making the best game they can, as well as the best setting from which to launch more games, and even novels, come to that.

Ok, then maybe I'm confused. I agree with pretty much everything that you said here, but the response of mine that you quoted was about how multiple clans (eg Phoenix and Dragon) should be merged Voltron style. Or maybe more like mixing green and red playdough. Is that the kind of thing you're advocating or not?

I played a clan during an arc where they were exiled for almost the entirety. The first decks that I played were control-mill decks. None of the specific strategies that we used back in Jade would be recognizable in Twenty Festivals or vice versa, but there's a certain spirit of the clans that have managed to persevere. That's what I'm hoping remains, and what I think a lot of the people posting here hope remains.

I want a great game too, but I want a great game that is still L5R. There are tons of great games out there that I could go play instead if I wanted to.

Ok, if you don't think the Star Wars prequels were a good example consider the Hobbit movies vs the Lord of the Rings films or the remade Clash of the Titans vs the old one. There are tons of possible examples. I picked that one because it's one that everyone recognizes.

I don't think most of us are advocating rehashing 20 years of the story - in fact most of us are advocating for the opposite, refocus, reforge, drive one. The clan identities are one of the things that most fans of the game feel is core to the brand. I really don't get your argument that they aren't.

Lord of the Rings made a lot of smart changes for the first trilogy of films, that made them better films than they would have otherwise been. The Hobbit trilogy were simply bad films, or at least the first one was, regardless of their relationship to the books.

Clash of the Titans is based on an "IP" that is, uh, somewhat older than L5R.

You can mess with and even rewrite clan identities to make them and the world better and more consistent without touching their cores. And frankly, many people probably disagree on what constitutes "the core" of each clan, anyway, not least because they've all shifted and changed over 20 years.

I never said the clans weren't important. But nor should they, or their histories, be inviolate for their own sake.

All we know is that things are going to change. I think the difference between recofusing and rewriting (or retconning) and the importance of some inviolable continuity is being hugely overemphasized over FFG making the best game they can, as well as the best setting from which to launch more games, and even novels, come to that.

Ok, then maybe I'm confused. I agree with pretty much everything that you said here, but the response of mine that you quoted was about how multiple clans (eg Phoenix and Dragon) should be merged Voltron style. Or maybe more like mixing green and red playdough. Is that the kind of thing you're advocating or not?

Not really, no. All I was pointing out was the difference between that, cutting clans, or keeping the same clans and only tweaking their respective focuses (and adding alliances, for game purposes) is a matter of degrees, not a qualitatively *different* change.

Everyone draws that line at a different place.

I think a lot of discussion here would be more productive if people argued from, "That's more/less change than I would like," on whatever subject, than from, "The thing you're proposing to change is uniquely sacred in the history of L5R," or, "Yes, that can be changed because it doesn't matter at all, whereas my hangups are important."

I mean, to the extent that we're being productive, as opposed to just shouting into the wind.

(And yes, I think we agree on more things than not, Kiseki.)