I'm very much in favor of limiting the card types in the game to

Personalities

Attachments

Holdings

Strategies

Provinces

I think the card types - especially those in decks - need to be severely curtailed.

1.) No more Gold Producing Holdings in decks. Whatever permanent Gold / Mana / Resources you have start the game in play. Maybe no more Gold Producing Holdings at all - just budget for the round.

2.) No more 8-million card-frame based sub-types of attachments with their own sub-rules. There's one type - Attachment. It can have a keyword like Follower or Sword or whatever.

3.) No more Rings in Decks. Rings should be something like Objective Cards in other CCGs - not introduced by random but static game elements you gain by meeting the conditions.

4.) No more Regions / Events - these should be folded into Strategy Cards

So I could see these types of cards in decks:

Dynasty: Personalities, Non-Gold-Producing Holdings (Retainers?)

Fate: Strategy Cards, Attachment Cards

With Gold Producing Holdings starting in play (maybe these could be a Stronghold, a Sensei, a Clan Holding, and a Farm) and the Five Rings and Imperial Favor starting out-of-play under no-one's control.

At that point you could have like 20/20 decks or something, playing a "round" - taking turns playing one card at a time until someone reaches an Objective on the round. Then shuffle up and play the next round. First person to win X objectives wins the Campaign.

Marty Lund

Monkey Clan * Random * Grognard

I´m with you Marty, but i would say that the objetives should be something that produce interaction.

I like the idea of mini decks with fast play!

Great discussion so far.

I just wanted to add that all of this talk about a 2 deck-centered game jogged my memory and I could only think of Vampire the Masquerade.... More than likely due to my not having played many CCGs,...

Apologies.

So I could see these types of cards in decks:

Dynasty: Personalities, Non-Gold-Producing Holdings (Retainers?)

Fate: Strategy Cards, Attachment Cards

You know, I've been kicking around the idea of how a pod system would work. I'm sure I'll get stoned for this, but it'd be neat for personalities to have retinues, a la conquest, that make up part of your fate deck.

Maybe just one in your dynasty deck (or even one starting in play, again like conquest) called your (Clan) Champion. Or maybe a core of X personalities. Idle thought. I know people weren't fans of pods in SW, but I hear a lot less objection about retinues in Conquest. I like the idea of the big guns that are personalities coming with their signature gear/followers/strategies/whatever.

Absolutely.

This type of design mechanism would, imo, certainly improve the "face" of each Clan (in regards to initial deck formation and play) and opens the door to much more background and game design allowance.

Well said BD F!

I'm very much in favor of limiting the card types in the game to

Personalities

Attachments

Holdings

Strategies

Provinces

Quick question: What would, in your opinion, would be the difference between Holdings and Provinces? (how would they interact and be differentiated among the other card types?)

I'd see Provinces more akin to something like an Objective or something, probably dealt out from their own deck (I'd just lump everything else into one deck) that players can fight over and claim, probably utilized as a primary path to victory.

I´m with you Marty, but i would say that the objetives should be something that produce interaction.

Well, if you look at the original 5 Rings and their play requirements that was what they were getting at:

Void: Play out your whole Fate Hand

Air: Use 3 Spells

Water: Win a Battle after replacing someone's Terrain

Earth: Destroy an Army or Province in Battle Resolution

Fire: Defeat an enemy with higher Chi in a duel

Setting aside the balance issues L5R players are familiar with, the purpose of these designs should be apparent - they rewarded you for doing stuff and their conditions were such that you and your opponent could struggle over whether you'd get them into play (to one extent or another). That should be the design goal of Objectives (be they Rings or whatever).

There's obvious design pitfalls you need to consider though - looking at the original rings should be proof enough. You'll need diverse paths that support interactive struggles, and that's no mean feet to design.

Marty Lund * Random * Grognard

I always thought fire and air had a strange way of coming into play.

I liked the 2 Favor action thing they did later.

Fire was somehow never good.

I think as long as the Rings remain a central part of design, I'll be cool with whatever card types stick around. I'm definitely in favor of consolidating all attachments into one card type.

I really do wonder how "necessary" a dynasty deck is.

Ooooooh.

What if you drew everything to the same hand, but if you want to play certain kinds of cards, they have to be raised up through provinces. Just drew a good samurai? Play him in your province (maybe face down?), and he'll be ready in some number of turns as he reaches adulthood and goes through his gempukku. Maybe use FFG's counter fetish to create a countdown.

Meanwhile, your opponent is trying to burn your province down. Rather than losing the province outright, they're taking out that specific card. Razing the village and executing your potential Samurai before he comes of age.

There are definitely kinks to be worked out -- come from behind would be pretty rough once your opponent had board control and could wipe out your province at will -- but maybe build in some kind of comeback mechanic where the "clock" ticks faster if you're behind.

Actually, this all sounds not super dissimilar to advancing agendas, but for bringing important cards into play rather than defining victory conditions.

Hmmmmm.

My thoughts run parallel to this. Again, just my opinion here.

Are Action Cards called Strategy Cards now? (Or were they always? ) Aside from that, spot on. No reason the various attachments can't be folded into "Enhancements," as in other FFG games.

I really do wonder how "necessary" a dynasty deck is.

Ooooooh

You have killed the sacred cow! (loose two honor)

Just thinking out loud here: How aout each province has "structure points" (life) so it's not destroyed by the first attack. Maybe replace Province Strenght? Maybe it could be tracked with damage tokens (FFG loves tokens!)

And you could have cards that deal with those: " Crab fortifications : Target province has +5 structure points." or " Dousing the flames : " repair target damaged province 1 point for each follower and water type shugenja you control." and " Plague : reduce target province's strenght by 2."

How about personalities who are really good at damaging provinces? "Spider clan raiders that can pillage: provinces damaged by a personlity with pillage take 1 damage at the end of your Dynasty phase." Stuff like that.

Crane Scouts can still damage provinces without winning battles, heh.