So, taking aside all aesthetic and marketing concerns, because I'm only interested in talking about game mechanics in this thread:

What are the core gameplay elements that make Legend of the Five Rings the game it is, without which, it would no longer be Legend of the Five Rings? Why?

For me, a big one is the balance between Honor and Military.

While I have some issues with the death spiral of province loss, some of the most tense games I've played involve racing to break 40 honor while desperately defending your dwindling holdings. In principle, I love the ability to sacrifice honor for the sake of expediency by buying corrupted units and holdings, or hiring a Ninja to assassinate an opposing personality, but suffering for that choice by losing access to certain honorable personalities, or other consequences. I have some problems with dishonor effects, also, because they sometimes seemed arbitrary; but effects that forced you to make a choice between suffering a negative card effect honorably or taking an honor hit instead were some of my favorites, even though they often seemed difficult to balance.

Without Honor and its impacts (positive and negative) on Military and other game effects, a huge part of L5R would be missing for me. Enlightenment wins I can take or leave -- I'm just as happy leaving the 5 Rings as abstract, symbolic ideas and not manifesting them in game play. They're just a legend after all. But if the new game is indeed an overhaul of the old, it must have Honor and Military victories (I'm okay with Dishonor not being a win condition so much as a control strategy to make your opponent's life more difficult and achieve a win through other means.)

Provinces, Battles and Honor through victory. The four provinces and the battle phase are a core mechanic for me, and a lot of strategy comes from how much of your force you commit where. All out attack on one province? Split your forces and try for two provinces, knowing that you're probably sacrificing one army for an easy victory at the other province, or perhaps as a feint to draw out a weaker opponent so you can crush him with the combined might of both armies? This connects to military and honor victories above, in the sense that you could get a quick jump on military might by sacrificing some honor, but redeem it through victory on the field of battle. Just as true, you could try for "clean" victories in battle, with honorable cards, and use the honor you gain to rocket to victory.

Dueling: In addition to being an elegant little mechanic, dueling introduced an important secondary consideration when adding Fate Cards to your deck. Just how important is that focus value? It wasn't always consistent -- it seemed that sometimes good cards had high focus values, so you had to choose between playing to from hand or losing a valuable card for a dule; while other times it seemed as if powerful cards had low focus so the decision was not in whether to play the card, but whether to include it in your deck at all.

In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that some sort of "built in" dueling mechanic might benefit the game. Some way to allow personalities to issue duels without card effects. Perhaps a dueling phase in battle, where each player (or perhaps only the defender?) can initiate one duel, but the result is only to send the loser home bowed. Whatever it may be, I think it would be neat to make dueling something that every deck must at least consider, rather than simply ignoring in the hope of not meeting a dueling deck, or being prepared to write off duel losses. Of course, the flip side of this would be that it would be very difficult to build a dominant dueling deck. I'm not so sure that's a bad thing, though.

Followers and Personality Protection: I really liked that Personalities were often treated more like generals than like individual heroes charging off to burn down enemy castles, and the protection followers granted to personalities was a big part of that. I wouldn't mind seeing more encouragement for non-military decks to play followers as well, and perhaps more followers will have effects other than force bonuses.

What are some of your requirements, without which a new version of L5R can no longer be called L5R, and becomes a different game entirely?

Mechanically?

I like the four win conditions- Honor, Dishonor, Military, and Enlightenment.They fit the setting, they allow for a wide variety of playstyles.

The Dynasty and Fate decks. The two-deck style really set L5R apart, and added a level of complexity I appreciate.

Different Attachments Doing Different Things. Followers absorbing ranged/melee attacks and Fear before the Personality can be hit by them. Spells being generally junk as protection in and of themselves but having potent effects. Items generally falling somewhere between the two.

Multiple victory conditions.

I am of the belief that they can change almost any mechanic. And frankly they probably will. There are lots of ways to mechanically represent the aesthetic, and I know you said that you didn't want to discuss the aesthetics of the game, but I think that the setting and world of L5R are SO IMPORTANT to the game that the deepest,and more core mechanics are Clan Balance and Multiple VIctory conditions..

Sacred cows I would be happy to sacrifice:

The tug-of-war over family honor

Chi

Focus values

And I'm a Crane fan! If they manage to give me the essence of court and dueling, I'm willing to unlearn what I have learned.

What I think is essential: Personal Honor has to have some sort of positive mechanical effect. "Honor is stronger than steel".

Dynasty and Fate decks.

Clan identity.

All nine currently existing Clans.

The Five Rings

And while not a mechanic, an evolving, interactive storyline where players make decisions that directly affect the story through both the card game and the RPG.

The Clans (and their characteristics) of course have to be there.

The concept of Honor as something to be earned and that influences the actions of those who follow its Code is also important.

Battles as winner-takes-it-all I would be happy to get rid of...

I am dishonor player at heart. I want the dis/honor stuggle gone. I want it removed. I want it to not even come CLOSE to being a thing in the next game.

The other 2 I am okay with but are also okay with losing. Well, I guess I like chi. Focus Values can go though. For sure.

Hi all,

Some of the things that were for me defining L5R:

- Win through Military, Honor or Enlightenment

- Alternative Win Conditions on top of this (related to for example the Black Scrolls or the Four Walls of Otosan)

- Dueling, Samurai and Personal Honor

- Characters and Experienced Versions of Characters

- Multiplayer mechanics as an integral part of the game. I've enjoyed the multiplayer games a LOT more than the single player ones to be honest.

- Story Tournaments to advance the story line and decide how the story will continue.

- A Story Arc that was very well integrated into the game cards and expansions; this is the part where this game really humbled Magic: The Gathering. The Day of Thunder story arc was the very best story I've ever seen in a card game and one of the best in board games in general. The story is worth reading even without the game.

I could do away with:

- Splitting the deck into two separate card types with a different way to bring them into play (cards in hand vs cards played from provinces)

- The "All or Nothing" combat mechanism; I much prefer to see combat at a Province split up into multiple smaller combats between characters much like Magic does with losses on both sides.

- More things that you can do during another players turn; I've had games where the downtime was absolutely horrible because I didn't have many reaction type effects in my deck.

- Simplify the large amount of card types. There were too many to begin with and they added even more as expansions were brought out.

I have to say with starting the game anew, it would be best to get rid of some sacred cows.

Someone has posted already the idea not keeping the current provinces approach, but instead having contested territories, over which the players could fight be the various means (Military, political, enlightenment). So, it would be basically always battles, but on some territories it would be political battles, while on others it would be military.

Duels should be in some form in the new game, but how exactly depends on how the rest of the game will look like. With that said, I would if it could be done without wasting cards from the deck.

All attachments should basically become just one card type, not like it is right now with Follower, Items, Spells each being a different card type, keywords are fine.

Regarding the decks, I think I would prefer to keep the two decks, but like I said, I am willing to sacrifice some sacred cows, so I am not dead set on this. But if the two decks are kept, it probably would best if it could be reduced to a 30/30 deck sizes. Maybe by having only three provinces (if the territories under attack approach would be used, people have to worry less about losing them). Also, having a better resource curve would help the game a lot, L5R always struggled with the gold curve durring the game.

I'd be fine if it was changed to one deck instead of two.

Multiple win conditions is a must but they can be altered. In fact I would love to see the honour/dishonour headache removed and a political victory condtion put in its place, you can still have certain clans achieve this victory condition by honourable or dishonourable means but that issue that the game always had with the two alternate win conditions being complete opposites has to go.

The Rings have to stay as does the Enlightenment victory condition although I know this would be very difficult to achieve straight away.

I hope all 9 clans stay, (and as my username would indicate please bring back the Nezumi as well) and I hope all 9 clans have their own distinct flavour

Me too.

But we MUST admit that the 2 decks thing is very iconic for l5r and alos opens up a lot of interesting design choices. We must also admit that nothing is sacred and it could change completely.

Iconic yes. Necessary debatable.

I can can see it switching to one with attachments getting simplified too. Especially with the way LCG cycles are designed and packaged having two decks and a bunch of clans will make it hard to give everyone content in each pack. Then again Netrunner has two decks, granted you ultimately play both separately but it's still something that all needs content.

Its gonna be interesting. Two years will seem so long and so short at the same time.

Things I definitely want to keep:

• 3 victory conditions: Military, Honor and Enlightenment. (I think this mechanic is super fun that you gain enlightenment during the struggle of your last province and win the game this way is simply cool. However I would like to see a more balanced approach between these condition. No Enlightenment is hard mode or something like that.)
• The 5 Rings! (In one form or the other these things have to be back.)
• 2 Decks (This is an odd one because it is a purely emotional one. I think the game would not be the same to me if I didn't have a deck to the left and right.)

Things I have problems with but would like to see them in the final game:

• Dueling (I like the idea. But usually this mechanic never really worked. The second problem is, it does not add anything specific to the game. It is just another way to balance potentially powerful actions. If it would feel as a more intricate part of the game I would like to see the mechanic return.)
• Experienced (Overlaying is just waste of space. I have seen nobody use this mechanic. The Experienced level can go and never return. However giving more incarnations to one personality could still be a cool thing so making subtitles for cards to distinguish between the Experience versions would be cool)
• Honor Requirements (Is a mechanic which I like in theory, but it never really worked. I would like to see a working version of this idea or it can go.)

Things that definitely need to go:

• Managing your Dynasty Discard pile (I am so sick of Dead, Discarded, Honorable Dead because it was clunky, time consuming and did nothing in 95% of the match ups. This mechanic can gladly go.)
• The Dishonor victory condition (I love playing Dishonor, having and interactive version of the Honor victory condition is great or making the Honor victory condition more interactive. But the Honor/Dishonor match up can die in a fire. I never finished those games, they were boring an tedious. Directly opposed victory conditions were I simply look at a counter going up and down and nothing is happening is simply not my cup of tea.)
• 80 cards + for deck construction (Could we go back to a 30/30 format or 40/20 or whatever... Simply make the deck size smaller and make the cards in the deck matter more. I don't need 20 cards in the game which have the purpose to draw a card.)

I have no illusions about this future game. I think it won't have any similarities to current CCG except name. Just prepare for another FFG like 'struggle/challenge' card game, this time for (dis)honor/military/enlightenment.

I would be totally fine with this... My has to be in there list is quite short...

I only want Dishonor victory to be kept. I am Scorpion Clan player, and that's what my decks are about (I don't like ninjas).

I only want Dishonor victory to be kept. I am Scorpion Clan player, and that's what my decks are about (I don't like ninjas).

Again, dishonour is not a victory condition, it is a elemination one, in multiplayer you don't win by eliminating one player that way thus it is not a victory condition. Sure, people rarely play multiplayer, and sure having all the dishour stuff has a nice flavour, but I think it should be combined with honour to a political victory condition, since like it is now, even most scorpion players are not too happy to play against honour runners, for the prolonged stalemate it produces.

I only want Dishonor victory to be kept. I am Scorpion Clan player, and that's what my decks are about (I don't like ninjas).

Again, dishonour is not a victory condition, it is a elemination one, in multiplayer you don't win by eliminating one player that way thus it is not a victory condition. Sure, people rarely play multiplayer, and sure having all the dishour stuff has a nice flavour, but I think it should be combined with honour to a political victory condition, since like it is now, even most scorpion players are not too happy to play against honour runners, for the prolonged stalemate it produces.

This is simply a terrible argument for a couple of reasons:

•Military was also an "elimination" condition. You didn't "achieve victory," so much as you "destroyed your opponent." Semantics arguments over victory vs elimination are silly.

•L5R was never well-balanced for multiplayer. They just didn't put any real effort into that style of game. It was meant to be one-on-one and to truly do multiplayer required totally outside-the-box thinking and designing (which they abandoned pretty quickly, tbh.)

No one was a fan of stalemate matchups, and the way L5R was designed did leave something to be desired when it came to Honor vs Dishonor games, but that's as much (if not more) the fault of Honor's design than it was Dishonor's. Laying the blame totally on Dishonor always felt disingenuous to me.

Well, technically the Military Victory in its current form is also an Elimination Condition. I guess that explains why Dishonor Victories were counted as Military Victories before Samurai. Yes, either Honor or Dishonor has to go. And Honor is just way more iconic.

I only want Dishonor victory to be kept. I am Scorpion Clan player, and that's what my decks are about (I don't like ninjas).

Again, dishonour is not a victory condition, it is a elemination one, in multiplayer you don't win by eliminating one player that way thus it is not a victory condition. Sure, people rarely play multiplayer, and sure having all the dishour stuff has a nice flavour, but I think it should be combined with honour to a political victory condition, since like it is now, even most scorpion players are not too happy to play against honour runners, for the prolonged stalemate it produces.

Reworking the honor/dishonor win condition would be nice, as far as dishonouring the other player would make you win. I won't be happy with dishonor being just a "control" tool. And that wouldn't stop military players to play shadowlands-like cards if you cannot lose by dishonor.

I only want Dishonor victory to be kept. I am Scorpion Clan player, and that's what my decks are about (I don't like ninjas).

Again, dishonour is not a victory condition, it is a elemination one, in multiplayer you don't win by eliminating one player that way thus it is not a victory condition. Sure, people rarely play multiplayer, and sure having all the dishour stuff has a nice flavour, but I think it should be combined with honour to a political victory condition, since like it is now, even most scorpion players are not too happy to play against honour runners, for the prolonged stalemate it produces.

Reworking the honor/dishonor win condition would be nice, as far as dishonouring the other player would make you win. I won't be happy with dishonor being just a "control" tool. And that wouldn't stop military players to play shadowlands-like cards if you cannot lose by dishonor.

That is why I think dishonour should be a political victory, that you can count upward like honour, basically as getting enough leverage on everybody to force the empire to acknowledge your dominace. So, it could be a race against other dishonour decks and of course not end up with being opposite to honour decks.

I think a rework of the Honor/dishonor is needed and support Drudenfusz here. Having a potical win condition/ elimination condition would deal with the current stalemate and still would give you the option to use both honor and dishonor cards to claim your victory. Yes the result would be that you have to rework the honor requirement system but I think this could be still a good Idea.

I'm very much in favor of keeping the split decks. This is because I have played WH40K: Conquest.

See, in Conquest, drawing a starting hand that's short on units leaves you with a significant disadvantage right out of the gate. If your opponent didn't have the same problem, this disadvantage is highly likely to snowball out of control and leave you in a horrid position for the entire game.

I don't want that for L5R, and keeping split decks is a good way to reduce the presence of that kind of thing. I mean, what are you going to do with a hand full of Items and Events, and no Personalities to use them with?