They could bought it for the setting, or they could buy it to finish off their potential rival (who also was sole king of the "samurai games") in order to not having to divide the pie of "people wanting to play samurai games" with AEG . If you can make a new setting and compete with already estabilished setting, OR kill that other setting and make your own, second decision is probably better; I mean, even during 2 years hiatus, people will probably go to your games because what else they have to do if they want to play card games? Go chase magic?

Gameplay comes first. Setting is secondary. If it was another way around, AEG wouldn't have to sell the game that was dying.

This whole "gameplay vs setting" thing is... entirely unproductive. ("Setting" here includes story, backstory, factions, characters, whatever and etc... "gameplay" here includes mechanics, time involved, flow and feel, whatever and etc.)

A game with great gameplay but a bland or bad setting won't last for long.

A game with a great setting but convoluted, imbalanced, tedius, or boring gameplay won't last for long.

And -- a game with gameplay and setting that don't mesh well and don't support each other won't last for long.

If your RPG has samurai duels, and your flavor/color text says "Samurai duels should be tense and dramatic, with opponents staring each other down, sizing each other up, and then an instant of graceful and bloody Zen violence..." but your mechanics always turn them into grindfests of a million strikes and two hours of repetative dice rolls... then your setting and design fail to support each other, and your game will suffer.

(Not saying that's what happens in L5R RPG, just using a hypothetical close to the subjects at hand.)

A game with great gameplay but a bland or bad setting won't last for long.

Tell that to people who are playing chess, poker, Go, Shogi, League of Legends, Counter Strike GO, Call of Duty(ies), Minecraft...

EDIT

And tell that to DnD, which is, at the core, setting agnostic. Also GURPS, Fate...

You have a point, but...

Chess, checkers, go, etc are a different sort of game than I think we're discussing here.

D&D in its various incarnations... the first thing the GM always had to do is create, find, or mashup a setting. RPGs without any setting are... what? I'm not sure. As for GURPs, I never understood the popularity, it didn't seem that mechanically sound.

You have a point, but...

Chess, checkers, go, etc are a different sort of game than I think we're discussing here.

D&D in its various incarnations... the first thing the GM always had to do is create, find, or mashup a setting. RPGs without any setting are... what? I'm not sure. As for GURPs, I never understood the popularity, it didn't seem that mechanically sound.

I think there are plenty of L5R players who do not care much about the story, they play the game just like they would play chess or go, as a game in which they can compete against others. It feels like only a minority at the koteis I have been on actually cares about the fiction, while most of the top players do not, they enjoy the synergy that the story lovers support/bribe them for decisions then can make. So, the game has to be solid enough to hod those players that play the game for the mechanics.

Regarding GURPS, the maths there is sound, but I just dislike the game because it feels too sterile for my taste. D&D is great o the other hand, WotC doesn't just provide a sound system with each new edition, they usually have the game mechanics build in a way that they can carry flavour regardless of what actuall setting one is using.

Talking about personalities - I wouldn't mind cutting down their number, both in card pool, and being deployed on field during game.

In exchange, I would like them to be even more central to the game. Let me explain:

1. Less personality dying. Personalities in CCG came and go, often becoming a Force Number With A Pretty Name in a mass of bodies that tried to slam dunk the province. Less personalities at the board means making each one more personal, and having personality death actually a big event helps hammer the narrative.

2. Personalities being key actors in all phases. You cannot perform a Political Action without a Courtier who is putting in it motion. No war without a Bushi fighting in it.

3. If we go away from Winning Battles = Province Razing and go more for FFG Objectives, give permanent rewards for winning a objective. Example:
During Summer (War) Phase, one of the players played "Tournament Of Samurai" card. This card allows a Military Conflict that gives participants points toward Military Victory. THE Victor gets to put this card under him, reaping specific benefits, because from now on, he is the Tournament Champion.

This hammers the NARRATIVE IS THE KING, allowing each game to create an interesting story, and hammers the setting, by showcasing multitude of conflicts that await samurai; war is not only against other players, but can represent tournaments, skirmishes against bandits, or even fighting off Shadowlands (in which case both players want to contribute towards it, and if they slip up, both are heavily penalized!).

Less personality death --> more room for creating their stories --> ability to balance personalities about idea of them becoming more powerful as they gain Glory --> bigger impact when they die during gameplay.

They bought L5R. I assume they want to use the setting.

In my experience that is not how big companies think. They bought the IP for brand recognition. Think of Disney, Star Wars and the EU, they de-canonized decades worth of novels, games and comics all to provide a more coherent story for a new generation. If Force Friday was any indication it was the right move to do.

And if you would base your opinion of "was it a good move?" from outraged fans posting on the Internet, it would be fair to assume that this move was a wrong one. On the other hand...Force Friday.

And if you would base your opinion of "was it a good move?" from outraged fans posting on the Internet, it would be fair to assume that this move was a wrong one.

If you judged based on outraged fans on the internet, no one would ever do anything.

While some changes might be worthwhile, change for the sake of change never is.

The mistake that so many gaming companies make -- CCG, RPG, video games, etc -- is chasing the customer base they think they could or should have, at the expense of the things that got them the customer base they already have.

The problem is that L5R's customer base was dwindling. L5R was not doing well. It wasn't doing well at all.

The fact that an IP has fans does not mean it is perfect, it means there is something good there. Maybe that something good is mired in too much bad stuff currently (it is). L5R was often successful in spite of its own best efforts to alienate players and readers -- keeping the parts that made it successful and removing the parts that alienate players and readers is going to produce a better result than saying "It has fans, therefore, it was doing everything right and shouldn't change."

I was a fan of L5R not so much because I thought it was good, as because I wanted so badly for it to be good. I'm not alone on this.

Realistically, a shift in the time frame should be expected by everyone. How much of a shift and in what direction is up to FFG to decide, but the reality is that one will likely happen, and honestly, it does need to happen. I understand that such a position might not sit well with hardcore fans of the setting, but truthfully, FFG is not only going to be marketing L5R to previous fans, but also to new players unfamiliar with the setting. If this game remains true to its roots of being a story-driven, interactive experience, then it is unreasonable to burden new players with the process of sifting through 20 years of storyline and continuity just to understand the present context of the game's story. While I agree that encouraging new players to read the fictions amassed during those years is an excellent suggestion, they should also have a neutral spot to jump into the story.

What I would like to see (but this is, by no means, a requirement), is a shift similar to those in DC and Marvel comic books, or in the new Doctor Who series. These IPs rebooted to varying degrees to reintroduce the properties to new readers and provide a space for them to engage the stories without the burden of 50 years of history. References to the past where often included, but usually never in such a way that they dominated the new stories. Additionally, for DC and Marvel comics, past foes, events, and plotlines could be reintroduced in exciting new ways, allowing authors to explore and innovate the settings.

Again, I understand that people want the setting to continue as it is, but I feel that we should expect it, as well as the mechanics, to change, hopefully appealing the hardcore fan and new player alike.

And if you would base your opinion of "was it a good move?" from outraged fans posting on the Internet, it would be fair to assume that this move was a wrong one. On the other hand...Force Friday.

I'm basing my opinion on the thing that most matters to stake holders, the bottom line

http://www.toyhobbyretailer.com.au/news/force-friday-pays-off-as-sales-chart-double-digit-growth

Nerds raging on the internet is not new.

I was a fan of L5R not so much because I thought it was good, as because I wanted so badly for it to be good. I'm not alone on this.

Yeah, there's a reason I got into the game at no less than...4? 5? Different editions, but never really stuck with it. Here's hoping FFG can really make it shine.

Also remember that most people posting or raging on the internet are the outspoken minority, and most people are happy getting products they enjoy.

While some changes might be worthwhile, change for the sake of change never is.

The mistake that so many gaming companies make -- CCG, RPG, video games, etc -- is chasing the customer base they think they could or should have, at the expense of the things that got them the customer base they already have.

The problem is that L5R's customer base was dwindling. L5R was not doing well. It wasn't doing well at all.

The fact that an IP has fans does not mean it is perfect, it means there is something good there. Maybe that something good is mired in too much bad stuff currently (it is). L5R was often successful in spite of its own best efforts to alienate players and readers -- keeping the parts that made it successful and removing the parts that alienate players and readers is going to produce a better result than saying "It has fans, therefore, it was doing everything right and shouldn't change."

I was a fan of L5R not so much because I thought it was good, as because I wanted so badly for it to be good. I'm not alone on this.

I don't think that I'm the only one who played hardcore for stretches at a time, but was keeping tabs on the state of the game to decide if the issues that had caused me to stop playing had been resolved. I'd sometimes dip a toe back in, but I never really got back to spending obsessive levels of money on it like I did through Gold and Diamond. (Not that those arcs were perfect, mind you).

I'm really hoping to run into a lot of people who "used to play back in X arc, and loved it" when the game relaunches. If they do this right, it shouldn't be too hard to reignite the interest.

Thats the point I was trying to nudge at, yes .

And if you would base your opinion of "was it a good move?" from outraged fans posting on the Internet, it would be fair to assume that this move was a wrong one. On the other hand...Force Friday.

I'm basing my opinion on the thing that most matters to stake holders, the bottom line

http://www.toyhobbyretailer.com.au/news/force-friday-pays-off-as-sales-chart-double-digit-growth

Nerds raging on the internet is not new.

And that's the problem with us Star Wars fans. We're genuinely disappointed with some cool characters and stories getting thrown out the window, and then we go crawling to the new merchandise like drug addicts. We send mixed messages. On one hand we are outraged. On the other hand we just can't stay away.

I expect the same thing with L5R. Some people are going to be pretty upset, but they'll buy the game anyway, nullifying all their words as they vote for the new product with their money.

While some changes might be worthwhile, change for the sake of change never is.

The mistake that so many gaming companies make -- CCG, RPG, video games, etc -- is chasing the customer base they think they could or should have, at the expense of the things that got them the customer base they already have.

The problem is that L5R's customer base was dwindling. L5R was not doing well. It wasn't doing well at all.

The fact that an IP has fans does not mean it is perfect, it means there is something good there. Maybe that something good is mired in too much bad stuff currently (it is). L5R was often successful in spite of its own best efforts to alienate players and readers -- keeping the parts that made it successful and removing the parts that alienate players and readers is going to produce a better result than saying "It has fans, therefore, it was doing everything right and shouldn't change."

I was a fan of L5R not so much because I thought it was good, as because I wanted so badly for it to be good. I'm not alone on this.

I'm not saying all changes are ill-advised, or to be avoided.

What I am saying is that game companies seem quick to respond to what they think keeps non-customers away, and quick to disregard what gained them the customers they already have -- quick to ignore or neglect or drop the good features they have, in order to concentrate on what cool or "must-have" feature they can add, out of sincerity or the desire for something to hype.

And that's the problem with us Star Wars fans. We're genuinely disappointed with some cool characters and stories getting thrown out the window, and then we go crawling to the new merchandise like drug addicts. We send mixed messages. On one hand we are outraged. On the other hand we just can't stay away.

You can still enjoy the old things, and also enjoy the new things. "Canon" is overrated.

I think the problem is the outrage, personally.

Talking about personalities - I wouldn't mind cutting down their number, both in card pool, and being deployed on field during game.

In exchange, I would like them to be even more central to the game. Let me explain:

2. Personalities being key actors in all phases. You cannot perform a Political Action without a Courtier who is putting in it motion. No war without a Bushi fighting in it.

This hammers the NARRATIVE IS THE KING, allowing each game to create an interesting story, and hammers the setting, by showcasing multitude of conflicts that await samurai; war is not only against other players, but can represent tournaments, skirmishes against bandits, or even fighting off Shadowlands (in which case both players want to contribute towards it, and if they slip up, both are heavily penalized!).

Less personality death --> more room for creating their stories --> ability to balance personalities about idea of them becoming more powerful as they gain Glory --> bigger impact when they die during gameplay.

The idea that personalities should be actors in every phase is something to strive for, but I think the design focus should more on players themselves as actors in every phase. Primarily, the players can simply use the personality to do X in Y phase. I do believe that a courtier should be better in any sort of court action, but I still would want the possibly of using a bushi too. Of course, the bushi wouldn't be as good as the courtier nor the courtier in a battle setting.

I'm really hoping to run into a lot of people who "used to play back in X arc, and loved it" when the game relaunches. If they do this right, it shouldn't be too hard to reignite the interest.

Yep, inasmuch as current players are insisting that they're the ones FFG needs to serve if the brand is to survive, I think the real market is 20 years worth of lapsed players and dabblers combined with new players who have never been exposed to L5R (whether they're players of other FFG games, or simply because FFG's retail footprint is*huge* and they might see it on the shelf in a mainstream book/toystore).

People want things to be canon, because if something is canon, then it's superior to things non canon, and thus, by liking canon things, you are superior to people who like non canon things.

It's a psychological mechanism that drives most of the "We are X, and you are Y, so we love x and hate y" groups. "I like heavy metal, not children's music like pop", "I like Classics, not criminal music like heavy metal", and "I love books, not kids TV".

Anything that helps to make a clear disctintion between us and them, AND can be used as argument of superiority, will be used as such and lead to creation of groups using it as central part of their identity.

edit

I do believe that a courtier should be better in any sort of court action, but I still would want the possibly of using a bushi too. Of course, the bushi wouldn't be as good as the courtier nor the courtier in a battle setting.

Give a Bushi a secondary role that can be used in Court too (for example, dueling) or give them a way to become "a Courtier" (for example, attaching a Courtier retainer/assistant/equippable), or from the totally different angle, give bonuses to political actions performed by courtiers; for example, making them cost less resources.

I think a lot of the "outrage" is shock from a playerbase who didn't see it coming. If the story from Z is true, no one saw it coming. The entire thing happened between the day after Gencon and now. There are people who just plopped down hundreds of dollar who feel like they were misled, people who were putting their own money towards securing venues for the upcoming tournaments, etc.

Change can be scary. There are people who are going to walk away from the game forever because they feel personally slighted or taken advantage. There are others who are fans of old who will flock back to the IP if it's a good game and captures what they originally loved about it.

I said some things an hour after the news that I don't stand by at this moment. There are probably things I'm saying now that I won't stand by in two years after giving it some reflection.

People want things to be canon, because if something is canon, then it's superior to things non canon, and thus, by liking canon things, you are superior to people who like non canon things.

It's a psychological mechanism that drives most of the "We are X, and you are Y, so we love x and hate y" groups. "I like heavy metal, not children's music like pop", "I like Classics, not criminal music like heavy metal", and "I love books, not kids TV".

Anything that helps to make a clear disctintion between us and them, AND can be used as argument of superiority, will be used as such and lead to creation of groups using it as central part of their identity.

I don't think that's *entirely* fair. In an interconnected media world, something being canon often does mean that it gets additional stories and sequels. So if you like, say Boba Fett, and suddenly his survival becomes not-canon, you stop getting Boba Fett stories (other than flashbacks or whatever).

In that respect, I get it. People want more of what they like, and for some, what they like might be tied more to a specific character or other element than an overall brand. It's also very often an emotional attachment. But that's fine. Stories and experiences aren't and shouldn't be purely rational things.

I'm really hoping to run into a lot of people who "used to play back in X arc, and loved it" when the game relaunches. If they do this right, it shouldn't be too hard to reignite the interest.

Yep, inasmuch as current players are insisting that they're the ones FFG needs to serve if the brand is to survive, I think the real market is 20 years worth of lapsed players and dabblers combined with new players who have never been exposed to L5R (whether they're players of other FFG games, or simply because FFG's retail footprint is*huge* and they might see it on the shelf in a mainstream book/toystore).

This pretty much describes almost everyone I know who is excited about this. We love L5R but hate the CCG model. Now we get to play again.