I just read the rules for the the 2nd Edition Game of Thrones LCG that Fantasy Flight is going to be releasing soon. While I certainly don't think L5R will be that game (or Star Wars or any of their other LCG's re-skinned with L5R flavor), I think it'd be cool if they could bring an element/feel that GoT seems to have to L5R.

For those who haven't read the GoT rule book, the "meaty" part of each turn is the Challenge Phase were players go back and forth challenging each to different kind's of contests (Military, Intrique & Power) each with a different result (killing of characters, loser discards cards, loser loses power tokens). This allows a wide range of characters to be effective at "combat". For example, Jamie, Cersei and Tyrion could have the same "strength" (challenge effectiveness), with them just being strong in different areas.

Like I said I don't expect L5R to just be a re-skin of GoT, but I do think a set up like this - maybe Military, Spiritual and Political - and deck's needing to address all 3 (with Clans obviously being better in some areas) would be an interesting direction for L5R. A player wouldn't play a Lion Military Deck, or a Crane Honor deck - they'd play a Lion or a Crane deck, and each player/deck would need to draw from all of the clans families to effectively wage war against another clan on all fronts.

Lets take the Lion for example - the Akodo & Matsu would obviously be military personalities, the Kitsu would be there to fight the Clans battles on a Spiritual level. The Ikoma (with Akodo support), probably the weakest of the arena's for the Lion, would be there for Political challenges/defense. Contrasted with the Crane, who would probably be very strong Politically (Doji) and Spiritually (Kakita and Aashina) but weaker on the Military side (Daidoji).

I hope I explained this well - a quick read of the GoT rule book and challenge system would probably make my thoughts/ideas more clear.

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/ba/2a/ba2a5ea6-a3cd-4772-a603-6f1906f63053/gt01_learn-to-play-web.pdf

They are going to take elements, sure. AGOT 2.0 is pretty much the culmination of all of FFG's LCG design experience.

I highly doubt they are going to drastically change the conflict in L5R to resemble AGOT's. If anything, it is going to be closer to Star Wars or Conquest.

Sure, like I said I doubt L5R will be a re-skin of any of their games.

But what I like about GoT and what I think would be a good change to L5R would be instead of a player playing a part/element/family of a clan, the player plays THE clan. And the games represent the two clan's going war on every front. Each family & character contributes to the conflict in their own way. Instead of having Lion being good at Military wins and Crane being good at Honor wins, there is only 1 Victory condition and the clans are better at certain elements of the conflicts and will achieve victory in different ways.

Making each deck have to consider different methods of winning and interacting rather than just concentrating on one would be good for the game, in my opinion. If nothing else, it would make it seem more like an honour and a military deck were playing the same game, rather than frustatedly trying to fend the other off while getting to work.

@OP

That seems like a very reasonable guess to me -- and TBH it also sounds like it could be a fun and manageable game. I especially like the idea of playing a Clan deck that does not need to be a [Clan][Type] deck; although I bet if there are multiple kinds of challenges as in GoT 2E then players will be able to build a deck that is unusually strong in a certain area relative to the overall weakness of the Clan.

If i want to play GoT, i play it, the same for star wars or conquest but il you mix all the thing and put them in L5R, what kind of game do we have, probably a nice game but not L5R ...

I'm not against changes, but against change that make L5R just like all the other games ...

I expect what might be perceived as AGoT's influence might be more generalized, reflecting FFG's design philosophies shared by all of their games to varying degree, rather than a specific effort to make L5R more like AGoT.

Like, action windows, three points of conflict (with the possibility of additions), unnamed non-unique characters, etc. There's a long list of things that exist in AGoT, but are shared by all of FFG's LCGs. We'll see how many of them show up in L5R.

There's a long list of things that exist in AGoT, but are shared by all of FFG's LCGs. We'll see how many of them show up in L5R.

Of note is the thematic similarity between AGoT and L5R, despite trading premodern European for Asian nfluences.

Of note is the thematic similarity between AGoT and L5R, despite trading premodern European for Asian nfluences.

I agree that the central theme of the game is similar, but I actually think that might be a reason to go out of their way to distinguish the two, rather than make them more similar. There will certainly be things they share between them and with other FFG games, but it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to avoid too many things shared between AGoT and L5R exclusively.

I really dig the idea that the battlefields might work more like Conquest than the poorly designed provinces from L5R.

I really dig the idea that the battlefields might work more like Conquest than the poorly designed provinces from L5R.

I do like how provinces work in L5R. It's not modern. FFG will probably not keep it like this. But I don't think it's poorly designed neither, in the context of AEG's L5R.

I'm sure both games with have cards and tokens.

It's rather odd though, in the context of the setting's clan domains that remain relatively static for over a thousand years, that a single game will wipe out a clan's whole territory.

It's rather odd though, in the context of the setting's clan domains that remain relatively static for over a thousand years, that a single game will wipe out a clan's whole territory.

I had always understood it to just be a lands on the edge of a contested area, not the clan's whole domain.

Makes sense. I suppose the reason I interpreted it the other way around was that your personalities, holdings and events aren't coming from anywhere but your provinces. When you're down to one province, you have only that province's flips to contribute to your war effort.

Makes sense. I suppose the reason I interpreted it the other way around was that your personalities, holdings and events aren't coming from anywhere but your provinces. When you're down to one province, you have only that province's flips to contribute to your war effort.

heh, yeah, it ain't perfect. I also like the notion of burning down my opponent's holdings and putting their samurai in training to the sword.

Sometimes you gotta just shrug and say, "It's only a game, I should really just relax."

The AGOT is really awesome and I think the similarities are quite obvious alright, and the three different ways to gain influence would definitely fit.

One big difference between the two mechanics though is in AGOT, I never feel like I have large scale combat which was captured so well by l5r. The scale of armies and the size of battles sometimes make L5R feel really epic. I don't feel like AGOT captures that very well, if at all. AGOT feels very skirmishy to me.

Big battles of course come with their own bag of issues, and stalemates do occur from time to time, and there is a lot to be said for the clinical simplification that AGOT employs, however I'd still personally like l5r to keep that large scale epic feel.

I really dig the idea that the battlefields might work more like Conquest than the poorly designed provinces from L5R.

And it's because of the way battlefields work in Conquest that I stopped playing the game.

I guess one of us might be really happy come 2017.

@OP

That seems like a very reasonable guess to me -- and TBH it also sounds like it could be a fun and manageable game. I especially like the idea of playing a Clan deck that does not need to be a [Clan][Type] deck; although I bet if there are multiple kinds of challenges as in GoT 2E then players will be able to build a deck that is unusually strong in a certain area relative to the overall weakness of the Clan.

And the clans individual flavor, strengths and weaknesses add to that. A Lion clan deck would be stronger at the military option then a Crane clan deck, which would/should be better in the political areas. And neither Lion or Crane would be as good at mystical/religious things then a Phoenix deck etc... It would create more......clear lines between the clans then currently exists, and each clans specific flavour could/would be that much stronger. Right now the Crab, for example, don't have a military Sensei - they have a Shugenja, Kaiu Honor and Dishonor Sensei. The most defining aspect of the Crab clan (big Hida Samurai with heavy weapons who love to kill and smash things) isn't really represented (their EP personalities are 3 Shugenja, 2 Kaiu and 1 Hida military guy) - a "Crab Clan deck" would avoid this kind of situation. The Hida would always be a big (if not hte biggest) element of a Crab deck and military would always be their greatest area of strength.

I expect what might be perceived as AGoT's influence might be more generalized, reflecting FFG's design philosophies shared by all of their games to varying degree, rather than a specific effort to make L5R more like AGoT.

Like, action windows, three points of conflict (with the possibility of additions), unnamed non-unique characters, etc. There's a long list of things that exist in AGoT, but are shared by all of FFG's LCGs. We'll see how many of them show up in L5R.

I said in the OP, I don't expect or want L5R to just be GoT re-skinned with Fantasy Japanese art and text. But I do like that element of the GoT game - the whole family/clan going to war instead of 1 element/family.

another element from another of FFG's games I could see making it's way to L5R would be the Warlord unit from Conquest. I could see the Clan Champions and maybe Family Daimyo's being used in this capacity.

It could also help further define a clans flavour/play stay. Akodo Dairuko would be a stronger military leader then Doji Makoto or Mirumoto Shikei, while Makoto would be the best politician of those 3 and Shikei would be the strongest spiritually. Nitoshi would be similar to Makoto just more underhanded. Tsukimi would be as strong spiritually as Shikei, though her understanding would be more shugenja influenced vs monk influeced. While Kisada and Naleesh should be just as strong battle field commanders as Dairuko but with different ways of approaching a battle (Kisada being more straight forward, Naleesh utilizing cavalry more/better).

another element from another of FFG's games I could see making it's way to L5R would be the Warlord unit from Conquest. I could see the Clan Champions and maybe Family Daimyo's being used in this capacity.

It could also help further define a clans flavour/play stay. Akodo Dairuko would be a stronger military leader then Doji Makoto or Mirumoto Shikei, while Makoto would be the best politician of those 3 and Shikei would be the strongest spiritually. Nitoshi would be similar to Makoto just more underhanded. Tsukimi would be as strong spiritually as Shikei, though her understanding would be more shugenja influenced vs monk influeced. While Kisada and Naleesh should be just as strong battle field commanders as Dairuko but with different ways of approaching a battle (Kisada being more straight forward, Naleesh utilizing cavalry more/better).

The 9 card sets are good but take a lot of deck space. Maybe cut it to 6, or, add a second 'lieutenant' like the new Synapse unit in Conquest. Two sets 0f three cards that can be used to create a leadership team. The combinations of leaders could give great flexibility over time and allow decks to become focused on specific teams or keywords.

another element from another of FFG's games I could see making it's way to L5R would be the Warlord unit from Conquest. I could see the Clan Champions and maybe Family Daimyo's being used in this capacity.

It could also help further define a clans flavour/play stay. Akodo Dairuko would be a stronger military leader then Doji Makoto or Mirumoto Shikei, while Makoto would be the best politician of those 3 and Shikei would be the strongest spiritually. Nitoshi would be similar to Makoto just more underhanded. Tsukimi would be as strong spiritually as Shikei, though her understanding would be more shugenja influenced vs monk influeced. While Kisada and Naleesh should be just as strong battle field commanders as Dairuko but with different ways of approaching a battle (Kisada being more straight forward, Naleesh utilizing cavalry more/better).

I do like this idea, except it doesn't always need to be Clan Champions or family daimyo. It could just be any influential figure in Rokugan at the time of printing that the story wants to push/advance.

Eventually sure, there could be a Kolat commander or a Ronin etc... A shadowlands monster would make sense... basically anything the story needed.

Though I would start with the Clan Champions, and I think the family Daimyos would make sense as the "next wave" of commanders/leaders.

I've just gotten into AGOT 2.0 to learn more about the LCGs. It is impressive. If L5R is built on the same frame as AGOT 2.0 but adding setting-specific elements (dishonoring, dueling, etc.), then I expect to be quite pleased with the result. Honor and dishonor as routes to victory basically already exist because political power and intrigue are two of the three ways to get VPs.

The themes between the two settings are so strong that there are even similar factions:

Scorpion - Lannister

Lion - Baratheon

Crane - Tyrell

Crab - Night's Watch (they defend an ancient wall!)

Dragon - Martell (enigmatic, playing a long game)