No wonder I feel so lost in many of these discussions. All I own is 1ed, my whole perspective comes from 1ed, and other various games I have played over the years. That being said, I almost feel as if some of the fluff from each previous edition is relevant to the latter editions. A history that helps support the ongoing story. I can also tell you that every game I have ever played has borrowed heavily from folklore, and mythology. However I have read that out sources are taboo in these discussions. Thus making this whole post irrelevant, and moot. I suppose that also makes my thirty some odd years of gaming irrelevant and moot as well. I am off to the retired gamer's corner then. Thank you for your time.

If we're talking strictly of the current edition as-is , then it's most constructive to stick to that edition (4th ed).

If we're talking about what's needed for a new (5th) edition, then nothing is out, and going back to the "fluff" of past editions to see what's wheat and what's chaff is absolutely productive.

I think there's an unspoken conflict in assumptions where some people are mad because some are writing about what is , and some are writing about what should be .

Yep.

Though I think it is probably also fair to say that if your vision of Rokugan is based solely on a single edition of the game, and it's not the one currently in print (or even the most recent past one), but rather one that's been out of print for over fifteen years, there's nothing wrong with that. But, if/when you find yourself feeling lost and out of step with some aspects of the discussion of later editions, the onus should not be on everybody else to point out, explain, and justify the existence of everything that's been written in the last, oh, decade-and-a-half. (Not suggesting you personally have done an excessive amount of that, Shinjo Yosama. But it happens.)

No wonder I feel so lost in many of these discussions. All I own is 1ed, my whole perspective comes from 1ed, and other various games I have played over the years. That being said, I almost feel as if some of the fluff from each previous edition is relevant to the latter editions. A history that helps support the ongoing story. I can also tell you that every game I have ever played has borrowed heavily from folklore, and mythology. However I have read that out sources are taboo in these discussions. Thus making this whole post irrelevant, and moot. I suppose that also makes my thirty some odd years of gaming irrelevant and moot as well. I am off to the retired gamer's corner then. Thank you for your time.

If we're talking strictly of the current edition as-is , then it's most constructive to stick to that edition (4th ed).

If we're talking about what's needed for a new (5th) edition, then nothing is out, and going back to the "fluff" of past editions to see what's wheat and what's chaff is absolutely productive.

I think there's an unspoken conflict in assumptions where some people are mad because some are writing about what is , and some are writing about what should be .

Maybe with the idea that nothing is out? You could still discuss what you think should remain a basis to rest characters, the clans, the settings, or even things like what the mechanics should convey to the player.

@locus: I'm going to focus on the one portion from the 4e book because that's the base book for the current rpg and the one that most players would read for fluff on their character. The other sections are unlikely to be read by the majority of players or they are from other editions. I notice that the segment listed doesn't do anything really for Samurai characters and focuses on an example of peasants. I imagine the reason for that is that the continued assumption is towards Samurai and would also explain why so much space is listed for their lives. Personally I'd rather see more focus on the idea of elements at play but that's because I'd want to tie in more with the name of the universe and because those element books are so **** nice.

Thank you Kinzen, MaxKillJoy, and Locust Shell for clarification.

Some things to think about when looking at magic systems in RPGs.

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

Some things to think about when looking at magic systems in RPGs.

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

+11111 to all of that. There's nothing wrong with that kind of magic -- but it makes the magic feel very modern, scientific, and game-like, rather than spiritual. #5 feels particularly jarring when juxtaposed with the cultural inspiration of L5R, where spiritual purity is a major component of supernatural ability.

Some things to think about when looking at magic systems in RPGs.

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

+11111 to all of that. There's nothing wrong with that kind of magic -- but it makes the magic feel very modern, scientific, and game-like, rather than spiritual. #5 feels particularly jarring when juxtaposed with the cultural inspiration of L5R, where spiritual purity is a major component of supernatural ability.

I was also looking at his point number 2 as being very relevant for L5R, with the setting element* of elemental kami that are an integral part of the fabric of reality.

( * I did that on purpose... )

Those are some interesting points, and definitely food for thought. They pretty much outline the thought process I go through for each campaign. I get into trouble at times because I consider all that knowledge to be common place, and accessible fount of knowledge to every gamemaster/storyteller. There are ways to mold any game systems magic to fit the feel of the story you want to tell. I have done it, and I have seen others do it. However the very fact that someone made such a detailed outlined post covering the topic shows it may not be as commonplace practice as I had believed.

I think it is very important to determine what level of supernatural your campaign will embrace. Whether the players will be able to tap into that supernatural potential, or will it be an obstacle that the players will have to deal with, or perhaps a mixture of both. Now that being said, brings us to the quandary of how to write a magic system that can tailor to the different storytelling styles? I believe that is why so many storytellers just alter the existing magic system to suit their style, whether it be low, high, or epic fantasy, or if it is supernatural horror so that magic is a obstacle, or opponent to the players.

When you give it considerable thought the versatility of roles magic can play inside campaign is another eggshell dance like that of courtly etiquette in Rokugan.

Those are some interesting points, and definitely food for thought. They pretty much outline the thought process I go through for each campaign. I get into trouble at times because I consider all that knowledge to be common place, and accessible fount of knowledge to every gamemaster/storyteller. There are ways to mold any game systems magic to fit the feel of the story you want to tell. I have done it, and I have seen others do it. However the very fact that someone made such a detailed outlined post covering the topic shows it may not be as commonplace practice as I had believed.

I think it is very important to determine what level of supernatural your campaign will embrace. Whether the players will be able to tap into that supernatural potential, or will it be an obstacle that the players will have to deal with, or perhaps a mixture of both. Now that being said, brings us to the quandary of how to write a magic system that can tailor to the different storytelling styles? I believe that is why so many storytellers just alter the existing magic system to suit their style, whether it be low, high, or epic fantasy, or if it is supernatural horror so that magic is a obstacle, or opponent to the players.

When you give it considerable thought the versatility of roles magic can play inside campaign is another eggshell dance like that of courtly etiquette in Rokugan.

I think so many RPGs are built (perhaps unconsciously in many cases) around the 5 assumptions he outlines in his article that most players (GM or otherwise) haven't ever seen any other sort of "magic system". In the same way they've been "educated" that RPG = "classes, levels, and gear", they also have been "educated" that magic system = "discrete rote spells, slots or mana, quasi-scientific".

Some things to think about when looking at magic systems in RPGs.

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

+11111 to all of that. There's nothing wrong with that kind of magic -- but it makes the magic feel very modern, scientific, and game-like, rather than spiritual. #5 feels particularly jarring when juxtaposed with the cultural inspiration of L5R, where spiritual purity is a major component of supernatural ability.

I was also looking at his point number 2 as being very relevant for L5R, with the setting element* of elemental kami that are an integral part of the fabric of reality.

( * I did that on purpose... )

How do you reason separating magic from nature, when the foundation of L5R lore is based on the elements that make up nature?

Some things to think about when looking at magic systems in RPGs.

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

+11111 to all of that. There's nothing wrong with that kind of magic -- but it makes the magic feel very modern, scientific, and game-like, rather than spiritual. #5 feels particularly jarring when juxtaposed with the cultural inspiration of L5R, where spiritual purity is a major component of supernatural ability.

I was also looking at his point number 2 as being very relevant for L5R, with the setting element* of elemental kami that are an integral part of the fabric of reality.

( * I did that on purpose... )

How do you reason separating magic from nature, when the foundation of L5R lore is based on the elements that make up nature?

I will have a hard time answering that, because I am in no way "seperating magic from nature" in L5R. That is in fact the opposite of what I am suggesting.

The author of the article I posted is ALSO not proposing something of that sort -- in fact, he is pointing out as problematic the way in which so many RPG magic systems DO "seperate magic from nature". His list of "5 things" isn't a set of rules for creating RPG magic systems, it's a set of pitfalls that he thinks too many systems fall victim to.

What I am saying is that I found his Point #2 particularly relevant to L5R because so many RPG magic systems don't fit their settings in exactly that way, by treating magic and nature as seperate or even opposed forces.

That might depend on how someone attempts to fit spells into the mechanics, the combat, and the general rules of the game. In the current iteration of the game, the kami are very much flavor text of spells, if they appear at all in the description. You'd have to actually make a substantive change in the game and really push the kami in every aspect of play.

Moto's question appears to have been reacting to exactly the opposite of what both I and the article's author were saying.

Some things to think about when looking at magic systems in RPGs.

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

+11111 to all of that. There's nothing wrong with that kind of magic -- but it makes the magic feel very modern, scientific, and game-like, rather than spiritual. #5 feels particularly jarring when juxtaposed with the cultural inspiration of L5R, where spiritual purity is a major component of supernatural ability.

I was also looking at his point number 2 as being very relevant for L5R, with the setting element* of elemental kami that are an integral part of the fabric of reality.

( * I did that on purpose... )

How do you reason separating magic from nature, when the foundation of L5R lore is based on the elements that make up nature?

That might depend on how someone attempts to fit spells into the mechanics, the combat, and the general rules of the game. In the current iteration of the game, the kami are very much flavor text of spells, if they appear at all in the description. You'd have to actually make a substantive change in the game and really push the kami in every aspect of play.

Another article on the subject. This one has mainly to do with magic in video game RPGs, but it's still relevant; I don't post it as a suggestion of what L5R magic should be like, but rather as something conceptually thought-provoking.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/columns/criticalintel/10302-I-Hate-Magic

If, after questioning all the assumptions, we come back around to something very like what L5R has in 4th edition, then fine, so long as we reach that point deliberately, instead of through momentum or simply because we walked the same old rutted road everyone's been walking since the first D&D boxed set.

I believe magic in a sense is an extension of the natural. This is how I have experienced it being used in fiction, and in folklore. (Let us take for example healing, our bodies will heal of most injuries or diseases, but magic in game and fiction to accelerate that healing, or even cure diseases that normally are not curable. Also gale force winds, tornadoes, hurricanes can occur naturally, but if they are summoned upon command, we call it magic.) By the examples cited you can see how magic both obeys, and defies the natural laws that we know, and can observe. Thus in my campaigns magic can bend the laws of nature but not totally break them. Thus giving magic that otherworldly mystery while keeping it within the boundaries of the story I am telling. I hope this helps.

I believe magic in a sense is an extension of the natural. This is how I have experienced it being used in fiction, and in folklore. (Let us take for example healing, our bodies will heal of most injuries or diseases, but magic in game and fiction to accelerate that healing, or even cure diseases that normally are not curable. Also gale force winds, tornadoes, hurricanes can occur naturally, but if they are summoned upon command, we call it magic.) By the examples cited you can see how magic both obeys, and defies the natural laws that we know, and can observe. Thus in my campaigns magic can bend the laws of nature but not totally break them. Thus giving magic that otherworldly mystery while keeping it within the boundaries of the story I am telling. I hope this helps.

Indeed.

Correct me if I'm wrong here -- as presented in the setting text, Rokugani "magic" isn't this thing that breaks the laws of nature, or a force seperate from a mundane reality -- it's the ability to communicate directly with the very fabric of reality, with the forces that make up nature and people and everything in the entire universe. Shugenja don't draw their effects from some power seperate from the world that everyone else lives in, they're speaking with the very stuff of all reality.

Too many things I wanna quote since I last visited, so I'll just make this a general statement/question:

If you are in the camp that feels that Shugenja are not fitting in their role as Priest, then you need to answer two things-

1) You need to define "Priest" specifically as it pertains to Rokugan, and you need to be specific. There is too much "but they aren't shown being priests" getting thrown around, yet no one wants to define exactly what they mean by that. It makes for very unproductive discussions.

2) Once "Priest" has been defined as it pertains to Rokugan specifically, you need to show how Shugenja fail to live up to that standard, using actual examples (source page numbers, fiction links, etc) rather than rhetorical arguments.

Furthermore, if you belong to the camp that typically says something to the effect of, "Shugenja are shown to be more like Wizards than Priests," you need to answer the following:

1) You need to define the difference, and explain with what lens you are focusing on this through. Is this a D&D comparison? Is it something else? What is a Rokugani Wizard? Etc.

2) You need to explain how being able to throw balls of fire, cause earthquakes, become invisible, or any of the other "wizardly" types of spellcasting somehow causes Shugenja to be less capable of performing their "priestly" duties. Again, with specifics.

I believe magic in a sense is an extension of the natural. This is how I have experienced it being used in fiction, and in folklore. (Let us take for example healing, our bodies will heal of most injuries or diseases, but magic in game and fiction to accelerate that healing, or even cure diseases that normally are not curable. Also gale force winds, tornadoes, hurricanes can occur naturally, but if they are summoned upon command, we call it magic.) By the examples cited you can see how magic both obeys, and defies the natural laws that we know, and can observe. Thus in my campaigns magic can bend the laws of nature but not totally break them. Thus giving magic that otherworldly mystery while keeping it within the boundaries of the story I am telling. I hope this helps.

Indeed.

Correct me if I'm wrong here -- as presented in the setting text, Rokugani "magic" isn't this thing that breaks the laws of nature, or a force seperate from a mundane reality -- it's the ability to communicate directly with the very fabric of reality, with the forces that make up nature and people and everything in the entire universe. Shugenja don't draw their effects from some power seperate from the world that everyone else lives in, they're speaking with the very stuff of all reality.

Yep, Which is why shugs aren't wizards in the traditional DnD sense. This also touches on WHY shugenja are the leading figures of Rokugani Theology. They get to speak directly to the very thing that created their reality.

It is also arguable whether "magic" even exists or not in Rokugan, but I think that could be another whole thread in itself.

Dude, Tsubaki . . . before you go making sweeping declarations like that, maybe go read the previous twenty pages? You were around for earlier parts of this discussion, but you seem to have forgotten them in the interim. I talked about what "priest" means to me, i.e. what I see in Actual Japan that theoretically ought to fit Rokugan, on the very first page:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/?p=1857373

I also discussed it here, which is another thread you were participating in:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191507-rpg-speculations-part-1/?p=1856096

You and I went a number of rounds over there wherein I laid out exactly the kind of thing you're asking for here. In fact, at your request I gave you chapter and verse on how the mechanics and the fluff weren't matching up:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191507-rpg-speculations-part-1/?p=1867871

So please, do not come in here acting like nobody has addressed your questions. I have; other people have. At this point we are going around in circles.

Dude, Tsubaki . . . before you go making sweeping declarations like that, maybe go read the previous twenty pages? You were around for earlier parts of this discussion, but you seem to have forgotten them in the interim. I talked about what "priest" means to me, i.e. what I see in Actual Japan that theoretically ought to fit Rokugan, on the very first page:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/?p=1857373

I also discussed it here, which is another thread you were participating in:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191507-rpg-speculations-part-1/?p=1856096

You and I went a number of rounds over there wherein I laid out exactly the kind of thing you're asking for here. In fact, at your request I gave you chapter and verse on how the mechanics and the fluff weren't matching up:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191507-rpg-speculations-part-1/?p=1867871

So please, do not come in here acting like nobody has addressed your questions. I have; other people have. At this point we are going around in circles.

With all due respect, he is asking for evidence and facts from source material that proves your suppositions, which is not unfair.

"If they're priests, then why don't we see them, y'know, offering religious guidance to people more often? Why aren't more of their spells about blessing crops and newborns and marriages,"

They do this. "More often" implies that you agree they do, however not as often as you see fit. Not only is this just opinion, but it also comes from your personal experience with the game. The source material is there, laying out that shugenja are the primary religious figures for samurai, if a samurai has a question about spirits, if they feel their house is haunted by kansen, where do they go? Do they ask a courtier? a bushi? no they ask a shug. For example, The Kuni are even pretty much exorcists, and the inquisitors are based loosely on the role of inquisitors in the catholic church from the middle ages. (not just in name,but also in things like information gathering)

"why aren't their techniques about placating spirits and divining the will of the Heavens?"

There are. It's called commune. One thing that I feel that is being overlooked is that there are 3 parts laid out to the shugenja use of kami. Sense, obviously to sense if there are kami nearby, commune, to communicate with them (this is exactly how you placate kami), and summon, which is the spells that everyone seems focused on. There are also water spells, that use divining pools in the lore. This is exactly what you are asking for, Like I said, you are supposing some part of your arguments are true, which it is not. This is why Tsubaki is asking for source material/facts.

The probelm you seem to be presenting is, why isn't this stuff directly in spells in the corebook, which is true in many cases. The reason, I'm sure comes down to the book is a finite size and needs to cover a certain amount of detail. It is still however covered in sense, commune and summon. The only difference is, this needs to be done mostly IC, which requires a flexible and informed GM. Which is why I think maybe, your opinion is skewed slightly by your personal experience of the game. You need to remember, spells are NO different from sense,commune and summon other than they are traditionally practiced and written down. It is for mechanical simplicity that they are written in the core books.

" It isn't that priests can't nuke things with magic; rather, when that's the majority of what their mechanics are for, they start looking like magic artillery rather than religious leaders. Call it a wizard if you want; the term doesn't matter. The real issue is the gap between the role they supposedly occupy in society, and what the system actually equips them to do."

And this goes back to what I just said. Just because something isn't written out as a spell in the book, doesn't mean a shugenja cannot do it. Does the book break down EXACTLY what arguments you can make with courtier skill? No, it doesn't, it may give examples, but that is to provide you with enough knowledge to make intuitive decisions. The shugenja's sense and commune abilities are similar to this. It is impossible to lay out every perceivable conversation a shug can have with a kami during commune, just like it is impossible to layout ever perceivable argument a courtier could make.

This is why Tsubaki is asking you to back up what you are saying. Opinion is great and all, and opinion and interpretations make interesting discussion. But it is when people suppose opinion as being fact is when, as you say, discussions go around in circles.

It's like this post was skipped entirely, along with several others.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/page-19#entry1890065

It's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion restricted to what's already in the game, and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself ( which it does, and we've given examples already, so stop asking for what's already been given ), and what could be done to address that from the ground up, which includes hypothetical changes from bottom to top. In the context of that discussion, nothing is "sacred" and there's no restriction to "already published material".

If you want to restrict your own discussion to what already exists inside the published material, that's fine, but please please please be aware that you're then not having the same discussion that some of us are. Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material in response to people who are clearly not restricting their own discussion to that box.

We're going in circles here because some people keep responding to a discussion of " what should be " (and yes that's a matter of opinion, no need to point that out again) as if it were a discussion of what already is .

It's as if some of us are standing here looking at a river and talking about how there should be a bridge here, and how we'd build that bridge, and what the trade-offs might be... and every so often, a couple of people standing nearby shout "There's no bridge there!"

It's like this post was skipped entirely.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/page-19#entry1890065

Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material when it's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion about what's already in the game, and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself ( which it does, and we've given examples already, so stop demanding what's already been given ), and more important, what the game should be in our opinions.

Erm...why should the "several" of you decide what can and cannot be discussed in a thread?

This post just basically says. Accept what we say as truth/fact and discuss what we want to discuss.

Personally, I am STILL waiting for source/fact where Shugenja are contradictory to the lore of the game. Even though it has been asked several times, All that has been returned from that question, is just opinion and supposition, which as I keep saying is fine, as long as it is not presented or presumed as fact, which you continuously do.

Express your opinions all you want, I am not saying anything against that, but what I see here is a lot of trying to present opinion as fact, which you have even done again in your post "and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself" . How is this a fact? You should not force the discussion into a position where everything you say is fact, and anyone who disagrees with you is opinion.

We all have opinions, and we all want to discuss the topic from our view point, that is fair. So stop trying to dictate not only what is fact or not, but what can even be discussed in the thread.

@MaxKilljoy - that was a pretty hefty edit to your post.

The large problem is many of the "what should be" arguments fail to address the fact that much of what is desired does, in fact, already exist within the setting.

The complaint is largely that it is too small in scope, or poorly explained, or what have you.

As Moto-san points out above, shugenja DO fill the religious role within the setting. Saying this needs to be reflected more just... doesn't make a lot of sense. If that's a problem you have at your personal game table, that's one thing, but the setting hasn't really had any issues with depicting it.

If you feel that shugenja, as priests of the kami, shouldn't be wielding such offensive and/or flashy magic... Well, why not? Why is that so anti-Priestly? This goes back to my question of "What is a Rokugani Priest?" (Many comparisons between real life examples and shugenja have been made, but we have yet to tackle what the setting defines it as. If you can't tell me what a Priest in rokugan IS, then you can't tell me they've gotten it wrong.)

It's like this post was skipped entirely.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/page-19#entry1890065

Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material when it's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion about what's already in the game, and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself ( which it does, and we've given examples already, so stop demanding what's already been given ), and more important, what the game should be in our opinions.

Erm...why should the "several" of you decide what can and cannot be discussed in a thread?

This post just basically says. Accept what we say as truth/fact and discuss what we want to discuss.

Personally, I am STILL waiting for source/fact where Shugenja are contradictory to the lore of the game. Even though it has been asked several times, All that has been returned from that question, is just opinion and supposition, which as I keep saying is fine, as long as it is not presented or presumed as fact, which you continuously do.

Express your opinions all you want, I am not saying anything against that, but what I see here is a lot of trying to present opinion as fact, which you have even done again in your post "and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself" . How is this a fact? You should not force the discussion into a position where everything you say is fact, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

No one is telling you what you can and can't discuss -- you're being asked to stop responding as if people are having a discussion that they're not actually having. In other words, to respond to what people are actually saying .

No one is telling you to accept anyone else's say-so as fact or discuss only what others want to discuss -- you're being asked to stop dragging us back around in circles as you ignore that the other discussion even exists.

No one ever claimed that Shugenja are contradictory to the lore of the game -- they've demonstrated that the way Shugenja are handled mechanically is contradictory to the lore about the Shugenja, and that the lore contradicts itself on matters religious, ceremonial, and cultural. They're also discussing how that lore and the mechanics could be modified to clear up those issues.

One of the people you're responding to actually WROTE some of the in-the-books-as-published material that you're telling that person they're wrong about.

At this point, all you've done is respond to things that people aren't saying , accuse them of posting what they haven't , and claim that they haven't posted what they repeatedly have .

It's like this post was skipped entirely.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/page-19#entry1890065

Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material when it's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion about what's already in the game, and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself ( which it does, and we've given examples already, so stop demanding what's already been given ), and more important, what the game should be in our opinions.

Erm...why should the "several" of you decide what can and cannot be discussed in a thread?

This post just basically says. Accept what we say as truth/fact and discuss what we want to discuss.

Personally, I am STILL waiting for source/fact where Shugenja are contradictory to the lore of the game. Even though it has been asked several times, All that has been returned from that question, is just opinion and supposition, which as I keep saying is fine, as long as it is not presented or presumed as fact, which you continuously do.

Express your opinions all you want, I am not saying anything against that, but what I see here is a lot of trying to present opinion as fact, which you have even done again in your post "and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself" . How is this a fact? You should not force the discussion into a position where everything you say is fact, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

No one is telling you what you can and can't discuss -- you're being asked to stop responding as if people are having a discussion that they're not actually having. In other words, to respond to what people are actually saying .

No one is telling you to accept anyone else's say-so as fact or discuss only what others want to discuss -- you're being asked to stop dragging us back around in circles as you ignore that the other discussion even exists.

Except when you say things like this to me.

"Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material when it's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion about what's already in the game,"

It's like this post was skipped entirely.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/191735-rpg-shugenja-huh-what-are-you-good-for/page-19#entry1890065

Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material when it's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion about what's already in the game, and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself ( which it does, and we've given examples already, so stop demanding what's already been given ), and more important, what the game should be in our opinions.

Erm...why should the "several" of you decide what can and cannot be discussed in a thread?

This post just basically says. Accept what we say as truth/fact and discuss what we want to discuss.

Personally, I am STILL waiting for source/fact where Shugenja are contradictory to the lore of the game. Even though it has been asked several times, All that has been returned from that question, is just opinion and supposition, which as I keep saying is fine, as long as it is not presented or presumed as fact, which you continuously do.

Express your opinions all you want, I am not saying anything against that, but what I see here is a lot of trying to present opinion as fact, which you have even done again in your post "and in fact are pointing out both how the game fails to match "crunch and fluff" within itself" . How is this a fact? You should not force the discussion into a position where everything you say is fact, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

No one is telling you what you can and can't discuss -- you're being asked to stop responding as if people are having a discussion that they're not actually having. In other words, to respond to what people are actually saying .

No one is telling you to accept anyone else's say-so as fact or discuss only what others want to discuss -- you're being asked to stop dragging us back around in circles as you ignore that the other discussion even exists.

Except when you say things like this to me.

"Stop demanding "source material" references from inside the existing L5R material when it's been made clear several times that several of us are not having a discussion about what's already in the game,"

Do you not understand that when you make that demand, you're demanding that other people not have the discussion that they're having, and stick solely to the discussion that you want to have?

Is the irony here not apparent?