- Consider what Wizkids did with battletech when they made mechwarrior.

I think it would be practical for FFG to drop the number of factions and lose the 2 decks idea.
Really the biggest thing they got from the purchase was the majority of the fan base, and the RPG line.

Was RPG line really that successful? It's hard to judge for me because of lack of hard raw data and the fact that other than us, lots of people here are diehard 1st Edition Fans. I always felt that RPG was a labor of love, but it was the CCG that worked to keep both of them alive.

Was RPG line really that successful? It's hard to judge for me because of lack of hard raw data and the fact that other than us, lots of people here are diehard 1st Edition Fans. I always felt that RPG was a labor of love, but it was the CCG that worked to keep both of them alive.

The problem is even if successful. RPGs are not really a gold mine. Even Wizards makes its big money not with DnD which is by far the biggest RPG out there. I mean you obviously can life by producing RPGs but you will probably not be filthy rich by producing one.

Was RPG line really that successful? It's hard to judge for me because of lack of hard raw data and the fact that other than us, lots of people here are diehard 1st Edition Fans. I always felt that RPG was a labor of love, but it was the CCG that worked to keep both of them alive.

I think that the distinction between "successful" and "profitable" should probably be drawn. It was successful in that it was a fun system with a decent sized player base, and it was a secondary product that could bring people to the CCG and could be sold to CCG players who wanted the storyline. But I don't think that it was a big money maker in its own right.

The game has to receive significant mechanical changes in order to work in the LCG model. With a smaller card pool, emphasis on playable out of the core set, and a desire to appeal to casual and competitive players alike, the mechanics have to undergo some degree of revision. Part of the reason why I exited the card game was that it was becoming more difficult to attract new players to a game with such complex rules and so much inertia. I realize that many people will point to the complexity and mechanics as part of the game's charm, but it is hard to argue against the fact that the level of complexity was becoming a significant barrier to entry for many potential new customers. A sleeker, more accessible rules system levels that barrier and affords more opportunities for the L5R IP to gain new players.

I would like to believe that FFG will attempt to find a middle ground to appease veterans, returners, and new players alike, and it is certainly possible that many of the CCG's trappings will find their way into the new game. However, the mechanics will certainly change, but we can hope that those changes will invigorate and reshape a card game that had been showing its mileage as of late.

The game has to receive significant mechanical changes in order to work in the LCG model. With a smaller card pool, emphasis on playable out of the core set, and a desire to appeal to casual and competitive players alike, the mechanics have to undergo some degree of revision. Part of the reason why I exited the card game was that it was becoming more difficult to attract new players to a game with such complex rules and so much inertia. I realize that many people will point to the complexity and mechanics as part of the game's charm, but it is hard to argue against the fact that the level of complexity was becoming a significant barrier to entry for many potential new customers. A sleeker, more accessible rules system levels that barrier and affords more opportunities for the L5R IP to gain new players.

I would like to believe that FFG will attempt to find a middle ground to appease veterans, returners, and new players alike, and it is certainly possible that many of the CCG's trappings will find their way into the new game. However, the mechanics will certainly change, but we can hope that those changes will invigorate and reshape a card game that had been showing its mileage as of late.

For gameplay itself, I'm hoping for as much reduction in complexity as possible without much loss of depth. That seems to have different meanings to different people, but we can't do much but speculate while we're in a holding pattern.

The game has to receive significant mechanical changes in order to work in the LCG model. With a smaller card pool, emphasis on playable out of the core set, and a desire to appeal to casual and competitive players alike, the mechanics have to undergo some degree of revision. Part of the reason why I exited the card game was that it was becoming more difficult to attract new players to a game with such complex rules and so much inertia. I realize that many people will point to the complexity and mechanics as part of the game's charm, but it is hard to argue against the fact that the level of complexity was becoming a significant barrier to entry for many potential new customers. A sleeker, more accessible rules system levels that barrier and affords more opportunities for the L5R IP to gain new players.

I would like to believe that FFG will attempt to find a middle ground to appease veterans, returners, and new players alike, and it is certainly possible that many of the CCG's trappings will find their way into the new game. However, the mechanics will certainly change, but we can hope that those changes will invigorate and reshape a card game that had been showing its mileage as of late.

For gameplay itself, I'm hoping for as much reduction in complexity as possible without much loss of depth. That seems to have different meanings to different people, but we can't do much but speculate while we're in a holding pattern.

For me... Complexity = Depth

Less Complexity = Shallow

The game has to receive significant mechanical changes in order to work in the LCG model. With a smaller card pool, emphasis on playable out of the core set, and a desire to appeal to casual and competitive players alike, the mechanics have to undergo some degree of revision. Part of the reason why I exited the card game was that it was becoming more difficult to attract new players to a game with such complex rules and so much inertia. I realize that many people will point to the complexity and mechanics as part of the game's charm, but it is hard to argue against the fact that the level of complexity was becoming a significant barrier to entry for many potential new customers. A sleeker, more accessible rules system levels that barrier and affords more opportunities for the L5R IP to gain new players.

I would like to believe that FFG will attempt to find a middle ground to appease veterans, returners, and new players alike, and it is certainly possible that many of the CCG's trappings will find their way into the new game. However, the mechanics will certainly change, but we can hope that those changes will invigorate and reshape a card game that had been showing its mileage as of late.

For gameplay itself, I'm hoping for as much reduction in complexity as possible without much loss of depth. That seems to have different meanings to different people, but we can't do much but speculate while we're in a holding pattern.

For me... Complexity = Depth

Less Complexity = Shallow

That is simply naive at best. Having more or less things doesn't make a game more or less engaging, satisfying, or 'deep.' If all you're creating is mechanical busy work (which was certainly the sin committed by a great deal of l5r cards. Especially in the wording.), you're not making a deeper game, you're just wasting peoples time.

The RPG itself was quite succesful for what was essentially a Third Tier project, with AEG stepping away from CCGs for Board Games the RPG was getting even less attention, and yet 4e is wildly heralded as the best edition of the game since the first in circles I frequent. But making an RPG is costly work and I would be shocked if they made back any of the money they spent making it.

Go is extremaly simple game, and definitely not complex one, and yet it's one of the deepest games on the Earth, to the point where machines that can wipe out chessmasters can't wrap their memory cores about Go.

Complexity is not always the way to go, it often leads into dark and murky path of convoluted.

The game has to receive significant mechanical changes in order to work in the LCG model. With a smaller card pool, emphasis on playable out of the core set, and a desire to appeal to casual and competitive players alike, the mechanics have to undergo some degree of revision. Part of the reason why I exited the card game was that it was becoming more difficult to attract new players to a game with such complex rules and so much inertia. I realize that many people will point to the complexity and mechanics as part of the game's charm, but it is hard to argue against the fact that the level of complexity was becoming a significant barrier to entry for many potential new customers. A sleeker, more accessible rules system levels that barrier and affords more opportunities for the L5R IP to gain new players.

I would like to believe that FFG will attempt to find a middle ground to appease veterans, returners, and new players alike, and it is certainly possible that many of the CCG's trappings will find their way into the new game. However, the mechanics will certainly change, but we can hope that those changes will invigorate and reshape a card game that had been showing its mileage as of late.

For gameplay itself, I'm hoping for as much reduction in complexity as possible without much loss of depth. That seems to have different meanings to different people, but we can't do much but speculate while we're in a holding pattern.

For me... Complexity = Depth

Less Complexity = Shallow

That is simply naive at best. Having more or less things doesn't make a game more or less engaging, satisfying, or 'deep.' If all you're creating is mechanical busy work (which was certainly the sin committed by a great deal of l5r cards. Especially in the wording.), you're not making a deeper game, you're just wasting peoples time.

I am certainly no greenhorn to card games. Its not naive when you seen with your own two eyes how it has worked. When you have analyzed what has changed, what is maintained, and what is lost. I have played several card games and watched how they have died and how others mutated into something new.

A quick example of that is the WoW TCG and Hearthstone. Several mechanical features cut from the game in order to appeal to the largest audience as the game goes from physical to digital. The physical side of the game was also regaining its traction and popularity around the time it was shutdown.

Don't get me wrong, I personally don't think FFG would cause oversimplification with L5R after looking at their other works. However its this healthy Cautious Optimism that I employ. Its what allow me to maintain my analytical mindset while trying to hope for the best.

A pure view of Pessimism is horrible as one's view can be skewed as one sees all the fault and wrongs in something and have a grim outlook of how something could shape up. Blind Faith is just as bad as Pessimism but for the opposite reason, one blindly accepts the changes and see them as healthy for the game as one wears their rose-tinted glasses which skews their vision that way.

Simplistic games like Go or Chess exist and that is wonderful. Yet they are different beast. Card games are always filled with RNG aka Randomness. With Chess the only random element is my opponent. With a deck of cards, the only random elements are: The cards I am dealt, who my opponents are, what cards my opponent has finally and how the remaining cards in a deck are randomized. In chess, I am not randomly given certain pieces and get new randomized pieces as the game goes on.

Ok, I'

we will be implementing significant design changes, but we will ensure that the spirit and emotional impact of Legend of the Five Rings remains intact <snip> by introducing a new mechanical design

This makes no sense. Why buy one of the most beloved games if your planning to change it so much. These designers can not wait to get their mitts on this to make their mark.. but I just do not get it.

I can understand a little tinkering.. like when AEG relaunched DOOMTOWN. but "significant design changes" ..... wow.. .this is scary stuff.

I'll field this one. There are a lot of reasons the base mechanics need reworking, below are just a few.

1. One of the victory conditons, military, reduces your opponents production by an equal amount it advances itself toward victory every time it advances toward victory. No other victory condition does this, military is the overpowered blue control deck of L5R. There has never been a time in the game where one military deck or another was not dominating the top tier of play. The consequence of this is that for any of the other victory conditions to compete as "tier 1" they have to be able to overcome a 25% to 75% reduction in production, which makes them feel like a complete NPE when paired off against lower skilled or lower quality decks. Its the primary reason when honor/dishonor is good its usually deciding the game by turn 4 and winning on 5. It also creates a steamroll effect where it becomes less and less likely that you can turn the tables and recover if you are the first person to lose a province.
2. Exponential resource growth. The gold system is screwed, notice how most of the best decks are the ones with the amazing economy? That contributes hugely toward the creation of the best military decks, which feed point 1 as well. Frankly if your first 2 turns aren't spent doubling your gold value you're not running particularly efficiently and are increasing your chances to lose against people who do. This contributes to the goldscrew/goldflood problem L5R has been trying to resolve since gifts and favors was first printed. The most popular and successful games stick pretty closely to a linear resource growth with a few exceptions and a handful of means to game that system. Examples would be hearthstones power system that increases by 1 per turn, with a temp bonus 1 for going second, magic's 1 land per turn without card effects to adjust it, shadowfists 1 power per feng shui site in play. L5R needs to adopt a linear growth system with exceptional boosts here and there which is going to change the entire costing scheme yet again.
3. Dishonor/Honor working at direct opposition. These two victory conditions when placed in direct opposition often force one deck or the other to go military or go to time in tournament play. One person adjusting a dial up 5, and the other adjusting it down 4, then reversing those adjustments every turn makes for a lengthy game that can often end in a stalemate. The victory conditions need to either be adjusted so that they can face one another more efficiently, or one of them needs to be dropped.
4. Enlightenment. Its a victory condition that is either combotastic and doesn't require much interaction with the opponent, or it doesn't work. I have no suggestions on what to do with it, but ideally their turns won't be spent searching their fate deck, and shuffling, then drawing, and shuffling, and bowing some dudes, and searching for another card, then shuffling, then putting one card into play, declaring one attack in a fashion designed to avoid meaningful direct confrontation, and shuffling, etc etc etc. Many players like the deck type, but many more hate sitting through the turns only to find out their opponent screwed up somewhere and cant win now.
5. Ivory needs purged with fire. Gold pooling is the most egregious offender here, but almost as bad is the design philosophy that everyone pays the same for force regardless of whether or not that clan always goes first vs other clans or not. It isn't a coincidence that low honor military suffered in the ivory arc with the sole exception of mantis, who benefitted amazingly from exponential resource growth and free gold.

Thats just a few of the reasons and I'm not particularly big into game design theory, im sure someone who is could tack another half dozen onto that list.

Ok, I'

we will be implementing significant design changes, but we will ensure that the spirit and emotional impact of Legend of the Five Rings remains intact <snip> by introducing a new mechanical design

This makes no sense. Why buy one of the most beloved games if your planning to change it so much. These designers can not wait to get their mitts on this to make their mark.. but I just do not get it.

I can understand a little tinkering.. like when AEG relaunched DOOMTOWN. but "significant design changes" ..... wow.. .this is scary stuff.

I'll field this one. There are a lot of reasons the base mechanics need reworking, below are just a few.

1. One of the victory conditons, military, reduces your opponents production by an equal amount it advances itself toward victory every time it advances toward victory. No other victory condition does this, military is the overpowered blue control deck of L5R. There has never been a time in the game where one military deck or another was not dominating the top tier of play. The consequence of this is that for any of the other victory conditions to compete as "tier 1" they have to be able to overcome a 25% to 75% reduction in production, which makes them feel like a complete NPE when paired off against lower skilled or lower quality decks. Its the primary reason when honor/dishonor is good its usually deciding the game by turn 4 and winning on 5. It also creates a steamroll effect where it becomes less and less likely that you can turn the tables and recover if you are the first person to lose a province.
2. Exponential resource growth. The gold system is screwed, notice how most of the best decks are the ones with the amazing economy? That contributes hugely toward the creation of the best military decks, which feed point 1 as well. Frankly if your first 2 turns aren't spent doubling your gold value you're not running particularly efficiently and are increasing your chances to lose against people who do. This contributes to the goldscrew/goldflood problem L5R has been trying to resolve since gifts and favors was first printed. The most popular and successful games stick pretty closely to a linear resource growth with a few exceptions and a handful of means to game that system. Examples would be hearthstones power system that increases by 1 per turn, with a temp bonus 1 for going second, magic's 1 land per turn without card effects to adjust it, shadowfists 1 power per feng shui site in play. L5R needs to adopt a linear growth system with exceptional boosts here and there which is going to change the entire costing scheme yet again.
3. Dishonor/Honor working at direct opposition. These two victory conditions when placed in direct opposition often force one deck or the other to go military or go to time in tournament play. One person adjusting a dial up 5, and the other adjusting it down 4, then reversing those adjustments every turn makes for a lengthy game that can often end in a stalemate. The victory conditions need to either be adjusted so that they can face one another more efficiently, or one of them needs to be dropped.
4. Enlightenment. Its a victory condition that is either combotastic and doesn't require much interaction with the opponent, or it doesn't work. I have no suggestions on what to do with it, but ideally their turns won't be spent searching their fate deck, and shuffling, then drawing, and shuffling, and bowing some dudes, and searching for another card, then shuffling, then putting one card into play, declaring one attack in a fashion designed to avoid meaningful direct confrontation, and shuffling, etc etc etc. Many players like the deck type, but many more hate sitting through the turns only to find out their opponent screwed up somewhere and cant win now.
5. Ivory needs purged with fire. Gold pooling is the most egregious offender here, but almost as bad is the design philosophy that everyone pays the same for force regardless of whether or not that clan always goes first vs other clans or not. It isn't a coincidence that low honor military suffered in the ivory arc with the sole exception of mantis, who benefitted amazingly from exponential resource growth and free gold.

Thats just a few of the reasons and I'm not particularly big into game design theory, im sure someone who is could tack another half dozen onto that list.

So many nails. So many heads.

- Consider what Wizkids did with battletech when they made mechwarrior.

I like the repurposed Industrial mechs... That's all.

Basically, the game is exactly 20 years old, and it needs a shake up. I hope a designer comes who is new to the game, but has lots of experience with other games (as a succesful player, but as a designer, too) has a fresh and hard look at the game and decides, with no preconceptions, what he needs to keep, what he needs to tweak, what he needs to redo from scratch, and what to do away with completely. Up to now, we have had minor patches which have only added to the confusion. I do hope the feeling of the game remains, though. But, honestly, just as one example. Did you really miss the honor requirement for Followers in Ivory? What the game needs is that multiplied tenfold. And then, maybe, we can be set up for another 20 years!

1. Ivory needs purged with fire. Gold pooling is the most egregious offender here, but almost as bad is the design philosophy that everyone pays the same for force regardless of whether or not that clan always goes first vs other clans or not. It isn't a coincidence that low honor military suffered in the ivory arc with the sole exception of mantis, who benefitted amazingly from exponential resource growth and free gold.

Wazzzzzzzzzzzup

(to be fair, art on this card is amazing, especially the "throne")

To sum it up quickly, FFG tinkers. It's what they do. If they get a new game, they will tinker around with it, usually.

How broken is this card. I mean they even forgot to add the "use this ability only if the card is honorable" phrase to the tireless action. As it is worded now it is a new mantis emperor box on legs.

also gold pooling is something which is good not bad. The economy in this game allways was a mess and the gold pool while still very terribel since no one changed the holdings to fit the gold pool

thing was better than most of the rest except things like bamboo harvester and border keep, which in turn made problamatic thinsg like rush decks great cause someone decided that having board control cards

in the game is stupid idea.

Therefore I hope for a complete change of design not only when it comes to the mechanics but also when it comes to the approach for controla nd combo strategies. I mean the hardest thing which kept me away from L5R besides the money was the feeling that everytime I tried to play it I had to play a aggro centered deck.

also gold pooling is something which is good not bad.

I dunno about that, but it sure wasn't new player friendly.

Personally, I liked the puzzle/challenge of constructing a gold scheme where the best efficiency wasn't necessarily with the most gold, it was building for the right holdings for the target costs of your cards. The flaw, of course, is that it was easy to shoot yourself in the foot, and difficult to see how you had done so at the table if you didn't know what you were looking for. One of the important elements of good design that's often overlooked is feedback -- how do you communicate to the player a) that's he's made a mistake, b) what that mistake was and c) *when* he made it?

So, despite the fact that I found that an interesting puzzle when deckbuilding, it probably wasn't for the best for the health of the game. Because most players want to be out their dueling and smashing provinces and...uh...being polite, or whatever it is people do in honor decks. Not counting coppers.

As a economic student with some intrest in math I actually despised the gold structure before the pooling cause it actually most of the time led to siuations where you have to use at least 1 holding in a suboptimal way and also yes it was pretty easy ot make mistakes which cost you the game without ever seeing why you lost.

what people do in honor decks is playing house of cards in Rokugan they want to get to a higher position on the back of others which they put down.

Also we are talking about L5R the game new was friendly or easy to undertsand for new players.

Playing a number of other FFG games, I can say that I don't think there's a single company out there that I'd rather see with the L5R IP.

They truly love making and playing games, and do a very good job at it. They will make a killer game, and right now my only complaint is that I can't go to the store and buy the core set today.

How broken is this card. I mean they even forgot to add the "use this ability only if the card is honorable" phrase to the tireless action. As it is worded now it is a new mantis emperor box on legs.

And why should they add it? Rules are quite clear: effects linked by the word “to” mean that the second effect depends on the first effect actually happening.

How broken is this card. I mean they even forgot to add the "use this ability only if the card is honorable" phrase to the tireless action. As it is worded now it is a new mantis emperor box on legs.

And why should they add it? Rules are quite clear: effects linked by the word “to” mean that the second effect depends on the first effect actually happening.

Correct. By AEG L5R rules (you guys are are going to love this phrase in two years ), you can not dishonor an already dishonored personality. Ask any Scorpion player, they know all about it.

Playing a number of other FFG games, I can say that I don't think there's a single company out there that I'd rather see with the L5R IP.

They truly love making and playing games, and do a very good job at it. They will make a killer game, and right now my only complaint is that I can't go to the store and buy the core set today.

Starting from this point, I must say that this is the boon that L5R gets by coming to FFG, which does make excellent, surprising complex games that have an enduring charm. Out of all of the board and card games I still play with friends, most of them were made by FFG.

Now, back to the OP, the game will be slimmed down to a Core Set of likely 200-250 cards (I believe that Netrunner tops the list at 252). This is not an arbitrary number. The Core Set for any LCG is fixed at $40, so in order to make a profit, FFG must slim down the contents of the set to address issues of physical weight and packaging, which cost money and eat into profits. This fact alone will drive significant changes to the game because the price point and manufacturing logistics put external pressure on the game to change.

Since the set will be relatively small, I foresee numerous possible changes to the game, including:

• The reduction of 80-card decks to 50 or 60 cards. This change might also shift the game from a two-deck to a single deck system.
• Mechanically narrow factions at release. With slimmer decks and a smaller card pool, the mechanics and themes of each faction (I am not going to call them Clans just yet) would likely be very focused. Additional packs and expansions would allow some movement beyond the core themes.
• Faction alliance and combination. Due to the limited card pool, I could see the initial decks combining Clans into factions with common themes (e.g. Dragon and Phoenix into a mystic deck, Crane and Scorpion into a political deck, etc.). Again, future expansions would allow players to run solo-Clan decks.
• Alternative and revised victory conditions. While I think that victory conditions are quite iconic to the game, I would expect them to undergo some revision along the way, such as Honor and Dishonor being unified into a Political Victory, and Military Victories working different than the traditional destruction of four provinces.

These are just some ideas bouncing around in my head, and I am perfectly willing to be wrong about any of them, but I feel that it is necessary to reiterate that this game will change drastically from its CCG roots, and people have to willing to approach the L5R LCG as a new game with familiar trappings and themes for it to work. I also feel that slimming down the game will not necessarily make it less complex. If you have played enough FFG games (and I encourage you to do so) like Twilight Imperium, Arkham Horror, and Middle Earth Quest (to name a few that I have played), you would know that FFG never has a problem with making a complex game, and more often than not, makes games a little too complex for their good (Twilight Imperium still takes far too long to play despite how good it is).

In the end, it is important to keep an open mind moving forward and allow FFG a chance to make the LCG their own game.