And YOU know a lot of people who like the setting. But that doesn't mean much of anything, and claiming that it's best to keep the old setting because the people you know like it is like Pauline Kael saying "How could Nixon have won? Nobody I know voted for him." You don't know how many people don't like the old setting because they aren't in contact with the community. You don't know if there's a vision of the setting you would like better.

I would like to say, how does "I know a lot of people who really enjoy the actual setting and I also really enjoy the setting." means that I know how many people hates it? I never said that I know that answer and you cannot say how many people likes or hates the current setting, that's just impossible. I would like that you don't place words on things that I didn't say. I've just said that I know a lot of people that enjoy the actual setting, it's a fact that I do know them, that's all. I never said more than that.

One thing that I can say for sure is that I never had any good experiences to a game when the setting changes entirely. For example, I still play the Old World of Darkness and hates the New World of Darkness and I think that I know more what I like than you can think of what I like.

If I would want to bring something such as: "You're wrong, people like the setting." I would have said it that way. Like I've said at the very first sentences: "This is really debatable." I'll say it again, this is really debatable, because it's based on personal taste. I honestly think it will be very hard to find a consensus on this.

Dude, I said that you DON'T know how many people disliked the setting. And I didn't tell you how much you like anything. Nobody put any words into your mouth.

I said that you knowing "a lot" of people who enjoy the setting isn't relevant to the question of if it would be a good idea to change the setting, because we know that whatever quantity of people loved the setting was not enough to keep L5R alive.

The reason setting get rebooted or relaunched is to make them palatable, understandable, and appealing to new consumers, by clearing out barriers to entry and re-focusing on what the setting did well and building with that in mind.

We know that there are not enough old consumers to make the game profitable.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me!

Rather than a full reboot, I think a time skip would be a better idea. Say, 50 to 60 years. That way, new players wouldn't have to learn the entire history of the franchise in order to understand what's going on. All of the old stuff would still be canon, though, so it wouldn't invalidate anyone's tournament results. Finally, it would also allow FFG to release game supplements on earlier time periods, so everyone wins.

I said that you knowing "a lot" of people who enjoy the setting isn't relevant to the question of if it would be a good idea to change the setting, because we know that whatever quantity of people loved the setting was not enough to keep L5R alive. [...] We know that there are not enough old consumers to make the game profitable.

By all accounts, L5R's economic troubles had vastly more to do with the slings and arrows of publishing a CCG in a shrinking market for expensive and complicated trading card games than with any other factors, including the "quantity of people who love the setting." (Unless "love" is defined as caring enough to sink lots of money into a card game regardless of whether they actually played it, which is pretty far above-and-beyond even the usual nerd love!) The RPG has always been a tiny, trailing baby sibling to the card game in financial terms. The whole L5R property, and thus the odds of getting a new edition of the RPG from FFG, will doubtless stand or fall on whether the LCG reboot is more attractive and easy to get into than the CCG was--and I'm afraid that doesn't have a whole lot to do with the vast majority of the detailed setting stuff that we RPGers care so much about.

Not that I don't think there are some things which it might be nice to change around or clean up (though from what I've read, Huitzil, you and I don't necessarily agree about what a lot of those things are). But for better or worse I don't think it's particularly realistic to contend that doing so--at least on any level beyond perhaps clearing out the most obviously confusing-to-newcomers of the metaplot developments--has much of anything to do with the immediate issue of "keeping L5R alive." A fun and streamlined ruleset, nice art, a lower startup cost, and good marketing--all for the LCG--is what even we role-players most likely need to bank on at the moment, for better or worse.

What I think was far more a problem than the Fans was the distributions strategy of AEG. I europe your really had to seek for shops to provide you with product cause the distribution of starter and booster displays was a mess.

There was no support for shops which wanted to try selling this game. There where no way to get flexible starter boxes , so you can meet the demand of you customer who maybe are wanting 3 dragon 2 scopron and 2 Crane

and 1 Mantis starter. Instead you had to deal with boxes that had one of each starter and if people did not like the clan the stater was sitting in the shelf and the shop was losing money. this in combination with the problem that

through the lack of support for new shops the game never flourished like it could have in europe cause if we wanted to buy new things we needed to impüort it from the US.

There's a substantial difference between "what would I change about this game" and "what would I change about the setting." The former is (within the context of internet forum land, at least) pertinent because they are going to make a new version of the game and will be changing things. The latter? No indication that's going to change at all, except with the passage of time.

If they don't change the setting, they are wasting a hugely beneficial opportunity that will never come up again.

I don't really buy that. I do generally buy the notion that they should be willing to look deeply at all sorts of things about the brand. But there still has to be a particular reason to change a particular thing. And there is very little, if anything at all, to be gained by just *poofing* things to be different about the setting, especially given that they've indicated that this is not going to be some sort of reboot of the setting (if you were rebooting then, sure, go ahead and change stuff, because that's kind of the point of a reboot).

So let's assume for the sake of argument that at some point our another in the history of the story they've written some terrible, awful, no-good stuff. Probably everyone who's been with L5R for any length of time can point to something they think is in that category, although we may all point to different things. But let's assume there was something lousy, and let's assume that we can identify what that was (note: I'm pretty sure that turning the Lying Darkness into Cthulhu is not it).

Assuming that, what's the point of some sort of big formal retcon? If you don't like the presentation of some old villain? Just don't bring them back. Or if you bring them back, adjust the presentation when you do it? You want a different flavor of Lying Darkness? Have the Shadow Dragon get consumed and go away, then just do whatever you want with the Lying Darkness, and justify whatever tweaks you're making by the changes wrought by that experience (and if the changes are more than tweaks, then why are you calling it the Lying Darkness instead of just making up a new cosmic force?). You don't like the idea of the Spider? Have them wiped out and then time jump and present any references to them as an evil the empire had to face. Don't like the mayfly Toturi Dynasty? Just don't mention it. There's no point in going back and pretending like the past never happened. Just don't emphasize those elements going forward.

I think this is particularly true for the notion that somehow there is too much history for new players, a notion that I think is mostly a red herring. Historical complexity is largely invisible to a newcomer. If you pick up the RPG and you read the brief history of Rokugan, and a description of the setting today, and it just doesn't get into every single aspect of the soap opera, then a newcomer won't even know it's missing. A super-complex long history only overwhelms the new player if you actually present it to the new player up front. Which would be dumb.

In sum, explicitly throwing out existing setting elements (outside of the context of a reboot) accomplishes little, if anything, and alienates some portion of existing players. The passage of time can take care of pretty much any adjustments you'd need to make, especially given that they'll be able to have the Spider's attack on the empire have whatever outcome they want (want to get rid of a family? have them die off in this war).

Except tamashii. They should totally and explicitly get rid of them, which I justify by noting that they were themselves a retcon anyway, so it's just a question of picking which version of Togashi's immortality you want to use.

I think a time jump would be extremely sensible. That way FFG doesn't have to drag all the existing baggage with it -- and by "baggage" I don't even mean "stuff they think is bad," just "ongoing story they didn't create and may not want to continue with." For example, picking up the whole Seiken/Shibatsu thing where AEG left it just locks FFG into a bunch of specifics, in ways that do create barriers to entry for all the new players they're hoping to pick up. Jumping also gives them the chance to jettison anything they don't like, though of course some things would leave bigger holes than others, and might be harder to explain away. If they aren't doing a full reboot, though, skipping ahead is the best way to give themselves a (relatively) clean slate.

So let's assume for the sake of argument that at some point our another in the history of the story they've written some terrible, awful, no-good stuff. Probably everyone who's been with L5R for any length of time can point to something they think is in that category, although we may all point to different things. But let's assume there was something lousy, and let's assume that we can identify what that was (note: I'm pretty sure that turning the Lying Darkness into Cthulhu is not it).

As I can see it, the problem is not that separate story pieces are bad, but that the overarching story itself is kinda not-OK. Even on the surface it has its share of inconsistencies and plot holes, but it gets progressively worse once you dig deeper. At this point, I say that simply ignoring the more obviously problematic parts of the story would only make everything worse as things would make even less sense. You really need a reboot and a complete overhaul here.

Well, I can't really engage on that without some sort of particular thing that you think is a problem that would get worse if you didn't address it with a reboot. But, more importantly, the indications are that they are not doing a reboot, so I'm not sure that really matters.

Well, I can't really engage on that without some sort of particular thing that you think is a problem that would get worse if you didn't address it with a reboot.

Again, it is hard to pinpoint a specific thing. The setting as a whole can be quite perplexing as two or more parts simply don't fit together, or even worse, they invalidate each other. Like Lady Doji of all people inventing the crude and unhealthy caste system, Fu Leng double-crossing the Lying Darkness but falling to Jigoku's influence, or Tengoku being OK with the totally mad Onnotangu but dethroning Lady Moon at the first occasion.

I don't see why those three are issues at all, much less issues worth rebooting a setting over. I suppose one could argue to reboot or recraft the setting if one found the presence of a caste system (accepted by all characters as perfectly natural and right) to be offensive. But rebooting over which character is credited as coming up with it (especially when your quibble is based on your personal opinion of the caste system when, again, in-setting it is considered perfectly right, natural, healthy, honorable, etc. - don't get me wrong, your out-of-character position is correct, and caste systems are awful, but it isn't a setting inconsistency)? That's kind of crazy.

And, regardless of that (because, obviously, me thinking that your issues aren't issues at all isn't going to change your opinion) they're definitely not anything that's going to be seen as an issue to anyone who isn't already invested in the setting, since those are things that a new or prospective player isn't even going to know exist, and that make no difference whatsoever to a group of characters playing in the setting.

especially when your quibble is based on your personal opinion of the caste system when, again, in-setting it is considered perfectly right, natural, healthy, honorable, etc. - don't get me wrong, your out-of-character position is correct, and caste systems are awful, but it isn't a setting inconsistency

It is a setting inconsistency, because the origins of the caste system is inconsistent with both the personality of its creator, the circumstances of its creation, its continued existence in relation of the rest of the setting (Why did Shinjo and Shiba let it pass? How could it survive the enormous social strain in the Crab Clan? Why did Akodo support the system when it spits two tenets of the Bushido right in the face?), and even its very own hand-waved explanation (it is said that the caste system is supposed to mirror the Celestial Order - even though I'm pretty sure that Tengoku doesn't have peasants or anything equivalent, and samurai were not a thing until Akodo). This whole thing is a mess that serves no real purpose game-wise, but it can sure confuse new players and disrupt immersion.

You're probably not the only person in the world who considers this to be an in-setting inconsistency, but you've got to be close. I've heard every sort of complaint about various aspects of L5R over the last couple of decades, but I've never heard that one. You're basically taking your (again, absolutely correct) issues with a caste system and imputing them to characters who don't have any reason in-setting to have an issue with it. I'm sure you personally think it's a really big deal, but even if FFG totally rebooted the setting, that's not something they are ever going to worry about.

More importantly, it is not going to confuse any new player because no new player is every going to be digging through the backstory to get the sort of detail you're talking about, and then engage in the sort of extensive consideration you're talking about (analyzing your takes on the Personalities of various kami and whether they would agree with certain details of how Rokugani society works). Even if it is a mess, which I don't think it is, it is definitely not a mess that is going to be visible to or confuse new players.

When I ended up with the L5R RPG books, I dug through a TON of the history.

You're probably not the only person in the world who considers this to be an in-setting inconsistency, but you've got to be close. I've heard every sort of complaint about various aspects of L5R over the last couple of decades, but I've never heard that one.

It was just an example .

You're probably not the only person in the world who considers this to be an in-setting inconsistency, but you've got to be close. I've heard every sort of complaint about various aspects of L5R over the last couple of decades, but I've never heard that one.

It was just an example .

And as such, it actually ends up being a great example of just how individual/subjective a lot of "setting problems" are. (Especially the ones that don't directly affect game mechanics.)

(I've seen versions of that complaint raised about this and other settings from time to time, and I always think of the outraged peasant in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" declaring that strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. He's right by the terms of any modern rationalist society, but the whole joke is that he doesn't understand what genre of story he's living in...)

I agree that a lot of the offputting stuff from the metaplot might be neutralized pretty effectively with a timeline jump, especially when it comes to the card game. Though I'll also point out that in the case of the RPG, contra Daramere, the last couple of editions have put a pretty detailed timeline right at the front of the main book, so in the past it hasn't been especially accurate to say that all the kookiness therein isn't going to be immediately "visible to or confuse new players." Stick that stuff out of the way in an Appendix in future and I'll be happy to agree with you about its relevance to newbies, though.

I actually like the caste system (from an RP perspective). The relationship between samurai and the peasantry contradicts modern sensibilities, and sometimes even itself. Trying to resolve that is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of roleplaying a samurai.

So yeah, there's really no way to fix problems in the setting without upsetting people, simply because everyone has different ideas of what those problems are. And there's no way to measure which "problems" are considered such by the majority, and which are considered such by only a few.

So yeah, there's really no way to fix problems in the setting without upsetting people, simply because everyone has different ideas of what those problems are. And there's no way to measure which "problems" are considered such by the majority, and which are considered such by only a few.

The point is that one shouldn't care about upsetting people with a change. The goal is not to appease the already existing fans, but to draw in new blood. And let's be honest here: it is easier if the setting has sensible and easy-to-understand rules - it helps immersion and simplifies introduction.

If we look at things like the description page, FFG's goal seems to be geared towards both the existing player base, older players who may have left the game, and new, potential players. If they just abandon the existing players, they've done a huge injustice.

So yeah, there's really no way to fix problems in the setting without upsetting people, simply because everyone has different ideas of what those problems are. And there's no way to measure which "problems" are considered such by the majority, and which are considered such by only a few.

The point is that one shouldn't care about upsetting people with a change. The goal is not to appease the already existing fans, but to draw in new blood. And let's be honest here: it is easier if the setting has sensible and easy-to-understand rules - it helps immersion and simplifies introduction.

While I'm generally one finding issues with the setting as given and with mismatches between setting and system, there's no way I'm on board with the idea of ditching existing customers for hypothetical new customers.

So yeah, there's really no way to fix problems in the setting without upsetting people, simply because everyone has different ideas of what those problems are. And there's no way to measure which "problems" are considered such by the majority, and which are considered such by only a few.

The point is that one shouldn't care about upsetting people with a change. The goal is not to appease the already existing fans, but to draw in new blood. And let's be honest here: it is easier if the setting has sensible and easy-to-understand rules - it helps immersion and simplifies introduction.

I'm not saying that they should be terrified of upsetting existing customers (although they should minimize that when possible). I'm saying that where you see inconsistencies and problems with the setting, I don't, and vice versa. Killjoy has a different opinion yet, etc. When no one can agree on what the problems are, it's a sign of a well-put-together setting. Tinkering with the fundamentals of such a setting should be done very sparingly, if at all.

While I'm generally one finding issues with the setting as given and with mismatches between setting and system, there's no way I'm on board with the idea of ditching existing customers for hypothetical new customers.

I'm not sure anyone would dump L5R if the in-setting caste system was depicted as a notably non-heroic aspect of Rokugan's culture. The picture painted thus far has generally been uncritical at best and “Look at all the happy little peasants working to please their masters!” at worst. I would say it's time to show what a system like that is really like and actually introduce the question of whether samurai living in it can be truly heroic or if their complicity in the oppression of other people (which the lower classes are, in spite of being referred to as ‘nonpersons’) makes it impossible.

I don't think it's true - or fair - to say that the caste system has been depicted uncritically, or that issues haven't been raised about the unpleasantness of Rokugani society. On the contrary, the Lion, who are otherwise the epitome of all things Rokugani aspire to be, are notorious for their general callousness in dealing with heimin and eta (eg, they believe that it's bad luck to have a peasant cross their path, and so will quite happily trample any peasants in their way instead), not to mention nonhumans (the Zokujin), and this aspect of their culture/society is quite heavily emphasised in the relevant sections of the various fluff books dealing with the Lion (Secrets of, Way of, Great Clans, etc.). Life as a peasant might be better among certain Clans, and worse in others, but there's no question that it's generally pretty bad.

Moreover, I would suggest that the vast majority of people who play L5R do so in order to play magical fantasy samurai (to a given degree of 'magical' and 'fantasy', which changes from player to player), not in order to interrogate the inherent contradictions of the society with regards to the lower classes, and its consequences for ethical standards in the setting. Navigating the myriad social niceties and cultural obligations of Rokugan is certainly one of its greatest charms, but the game as it currently stands (and has stood since its inception) is about samurai, and the vast majority of meaningful player interactions are going to be with other samurai. I'm not sure that anyone would quit outright if the plight of the peasantry was given greater prominence, and there's certainly a place for introducing, say, sympathetic peasant rebels who just want to live their life without being under the boot (sandal? geta?) of the samurai class - it can make for an interesting campaign, if you have good role-players - but I can certainly imagine people quitting if told, for instance, "No, sorry, you can't be an honourable Lion without contesting the Lion traditions of oppressing the heimin, because they fundamentally contradict modern standards of moral behaviour."

On the contrary, the Lion, who are otherwise the epitome of all things Rokugani aspire to be, are notorious for their general callousness in dealing with heimin and eta (eg, they believe that it's bad luck to have a peasant cross their path, and so will quite happily trample any peasants in their way instead)

I honestly have to roll my eyes at that. Seriously? How do the Lion ever travel through cities? Work with doshin or ashigaru? Wander the halls of any estate large enough to have servants? It's one thing to say "the Lion are jerks to heimin" -- that's entirely plausible -- but what you just described resoundingly fails the anthropological sniff test.

While I'm generally one finding issues with the setting as given and with mismatches between setting and system, there's no way I'm on board with the idea of ditching existing customers for hypothetical new customers.

I don't say that they should ditch old customers. I mean, nobody would quit because the caste system is a thing of the past. Though, I must add, gunning for hypothetical new customers is something the RPG must do in order to stay alive, and ditching existing customers might be a fair cost from a strictly success-oriented view.

When no one can agree on what the problems are, it's a sign of a well-put-together setting.

It is more like a sign of very diverse problems people can cherry-pick at whim. That's as far from a well-put-together setting as it can be IMHO .

Moreover, I would suggest that the vast majority of people who play L5R do so in order to play magical fantasy samurai (to a given degree of 'magical' and 'fantasy', which changes from player to player), not in order to interrogate the inherent contradictions of the society with regards to the lower classes, and its consequences for ethical standards in the setting.

You can't really have one without running into the other. Unless the players avoid non-samurai like plague. And once someone runs into the problem, the djinn will be out from the bottle... I mean, I did not mind the caste system until my Utaku Battle Maiden decided to adopt an eta girl.

"No, sorry, you can't be an honourable Lion without contesting the Lion traditions of oppressing the heimin, because they fundamentally contradict modern standards of moral behaviour."

The funny thing is that it contradicts in-setting standards of moral behavior too (namely the Bushido tenets of Compassion and Courtesy, and probably Duty and Honor too).

On the contrary, the Lion, who are otherwise the epitome of all things Rokugani aspire to be, are notorious for their general callousness in dealing with heimin and eta (eg, they believe that it's bad luck to have a peasant cross their path, and so will quite happily trample any peasants in their way instead)

I honestly have to roll my eyes at that. Seriously? How do the Lion ever travel through cities? Work with doshin or ashigaru? Wander the halls of any estate large enough to have servants? It's one thing to say "the Lion are jerks to heimin" -- that's entirely plausible -- but what you just described resoundingly fails the anthropological sniff test.

Credit to your instincts! I looked up the original source for that point (Secrets of the Lion, p. 5) - to be sure, and it clarifies that the superstition is, specifically, that a peasant crossing your path while you're riding can make your horse break your legs, which means it's only an issue while mounted. Granted, there are still issues - when riding through city streets, for instance - but it's at least not an issue indoors.

Also, there is no shortage of things within the setting that make little to no sense, and/or are mutually contradictory. Whether or not this custom is plausible, it does at least serve its intended purpose, of illustrating the ways in which the Lion are unpleasant to the peasantry.