Now, does this depend on the GM adjudicating Raises in a fair and sensible fashion? Yes. But that's true of the Raise mechanic, period, outside the few instances (manuevers, spells) where its use is very numerically delineated. If Raises get used at all in normal (non-technique) social rolls, we're going to have to deal with a degree of GM judgment. My solution there is just to try to be extra-clear about how I'm viewing this, and give lots of examples. I can attempt to be clearer on the Deceit Raises thing in the actual document.

Raises in general are an area where I think the published RPG really falls down by not providing a framework on what sort of task or difficulty would require what sort of TN or how many raises.

It does give guidelines for TNs. But yes, 4e did very little to talk about Raises in any context other than combat.

I've been cogitating about Opportunities, but I keep ending up checking this thread on my phone, on which this forum works pretty horribly, so I think I'll hold off for a bit longer :/

Do you mean ideas for more, or thoughts on how they could be different? Ideas for more, I got plenty of already. :-P Just need the time to type them up.

Little bit of A, little bit of B. If you don't need suggestions for Opportunities, I won't take time to type 'em--it sounds as if we have quite similar ideas about the range of stuff they could cover, compared to Mass Battle opportunities which are, logically enough, nearly all about fightin' stuff.

One thing I'll point out you might want to account for is that your Glory damage (for lack of a better word) across the board looks like it's transposed straight from the damage dice in the Mass Battle table--but of course most bushi PCs participating in a battle are going to be wearing armor and/or have some other way of getting Reduction. There's no concrete guidance on this one way or another in the corebook, but I've seen that many GMs even apply Reduction separately to each die of Mass Battle damage, on the assumption that it represents hits from multiple opponents over the whole period of time represented by the Battle Turn, which would knock the real damage amounts down even further. And of course if all else fails one can tag in the party shugenja for a little Path to Inner Peace, or spend Void to reduce damage that'd otherwise knock one out of the fight. Even without any Reduction, the maximum 6k6 damage actually only has about a 5% chance of killing an Earth 3 character who's at full health (57 Wounds), and only about a 20% chance of putting them Down. But it has a 74% chance of doing enough Glory damage to make the Emperor (Glory 4.0) sit out the rest of the court battle in ignominy. (Or 35% chance for a "Victorious War Hero" of Glory 5, if you prefer.)

On the other hand, PCs in a Court Battle may be gaining a little Glory in static increments at the same time as they're losing it, and one isn't going to actually die from being reduced to Glory 0. But they also may actually be getting less Glory from Opportunities than they would in a Mass Battle, since not that many of the Political Opportunities you've got so far give Glory (makes sense, not all of them are necessarily Glorious) while a preponderance of the battle Heroic Opportunities end in skirmishes or duels which do. In any case, I think it's worth considering that Glory, while theoretically unlimited by PC stats, is a harder resource to build up and replenish in the short term than Wounds, and might require a rather differently calibrated damage table--and really in general quite a bit of number-crunching about how the Glory economy is going to work once it has to function as a spend-able resource. (Does Glory decline from "idleness" still happen? Is your baseline Glory linked to your Insight Rank at all? Etc. etc.)

I guess, sort of on the same note, I'd also like to push back a bit against the idea that court battle doesn't need to be practicable for early-game PCs. On the contrary, in theory at least, it seems to me like a great way for newish PCs to experience being cogs in the wheels of court in a fun and meaningful-feeling way--just as you can do a Mass Battle with a party of reasonably sturdy Rank 1 PCs, who don't have to be the Generals of their side or all be constantly Heavily Engaged to participate. It seems like a shame to go to all the trouble of building the thing and then stipulate that you've got to have a party that's climbed up to Glory 3.5 ("The Emperor's Children") or 4 ("The Emperor," "Minor Clan Champion") to use it effectively.

I'm not done futzing with Court Battle, but I'm getting impatient to move on to some school techniques, so. :-) (locust shell, your reply came in while I was typing this; I'll get to it shortly.)

Starting off with Kitsuki Investigator, as it happens to be the first one I've finished. Couple of starting principles:

1) At a minimum, I'm making the necessary alterations for the skill usage to fit the framework I've created.

2) No sacred cows: anything is fair game to be chucked and replaced if I feel like it.

3) I'm trying to minimize techs that amount to "you roll better at the same thing everybody else can do." In moderation that kind of thing is fine, but a lot of the courtier schools have a Free Raise as part of their R1 and +5k0 as their R5, which is kind of underwhelming; it feels like the DT didn't have a great handle on the social side, and had difficulty thinking up ways for courtiers to be mechanized other than with simple bonuses. In particular, for R5 I want to come up with something much more unique and interesting wherever possible.

This would be easier to follow if I quoted the original techs, but I don't want to violate copyright wholesale, so I'm only noting where things are different. If you want to play along at home, you'll need your 4e core book on hand. :-)

KITSUKI INVESTIGATOR

Skills: Etiquette (Composure), Influence, Investigation (Interrogation), Kenjutsu, Meditation, Sincerity, any one Lore Skill

Rank 1: Perception bonus to ATN is the same, plus you get +1k0 per School Rank to Investigation.

Rank 2: Bonus against Feint and Disarm is the same; other half is gone. Sage-equivalent benefit when trying to recall facts relevant to investigating a crime.

Rank 3: roll is contested Investigation (Interrogation) / Perception vs Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower.

Rank 4: using the tech takes a day of asking around court, but the roll is Investigation (Interrogation) / Awareness at TN 20, rather than contested. Each increment of 5 over the TN gets you another name, but allies/enemies who are making an effort to conceal the connection may require an increment of 10, at GM's discretion. (Ditched Raises because you're not likely to overlook one ally because you were trying to find two.)

Rank 5: If you beat someone in a contested roll of your Investigation (Interrogation) / Perception against their Sincerity (Deceit) / Awareness with a margin of at least 10, you may spend a VP to automatically sniff out their lies for the remainder of the scene. (The idea is that once you've seen through the mask, you've got their number.)

(*I split Acting into Perform: Acting and Craft: Disguise.)

It's not done yet; in fact, I made changes from my notes while typing it up. But it's a start. Thoughts?

Now, does this depend on the GM adjudicating Raises in a fair and sensible fashion? Yes. But that's true of the Raise mechanic, period, outside the few instances (manuevers, spells) where its use is very numerically delineated. If Raises get used at all in normal (non-technique) social rolls, we're going to have to deal with a degree of GM judgment. My solution there is just to try to be extra-clear about how I'm viewing this, and give lots of examples. I can attempt to be clearer on the Deceit Raises thing in the actual document.

Raises in general are an area where I think the published RPG really falls down by not providing a framework on what sort of task or difficulty would require what sort of TN or how many raises.

It does give guidelines for TNs. But yes, 4e did very little to talk about Raises in any context other than combat.

You're right, I'd forgotten that little table.

One thing I'll point out you might want to account for is that your Glory damage (for lack of a better word) across the board looks like it's transposed straight from the damage dice in the Mass Battle table--but of course most bushi PCs participating in a battle are going to be wearing armor and/or have some other way of getting Reduction. There's no concrete guidance on this one way or another in the corebook, but I've seen that many GMs even apply Reduction separately to each die of Mass Battle damage, on the assumption that it represents hits from multiple opponents over the whole period of time represented by the Battle Turn, which would knock the real damage amounts down even further.

Ah -- whereas I was assuming a) only one application of Reduction and b) the possibility of exploding 10s, which I explicitly ruled out here. I kind of thought the MB table was liable to kill a character in two rounds, so I toned down the numbers . . . but I changed them several times, so they may have wound up the same as on the MB table after all. <lol>

(Does Glory decline from "idleness" still happen? Is your baseline Glory linked to your Insight Rank at all? Etc. etc.)

Yes to both, though idleness cannot make it decay below your Insight Rank.

I guess, sort of on the same note, I'd also like to push back a bit against the idea that court battle doesn't need to be practicable for early-game PCs. On the contrary, in theory at least, it seems to me like a great way for newish PCs to experience being cogs in the wheels of court in a fun and meaningful-feeling way--just as you can do a Mass Battle with a party of reasonably sturdy Rank 1 PCs, who don't have to be the Generals of their side or all be constantly Heavily Engaged to participate.

By "newbie" I meant PCs who haven't done *anything* to attract notice, i.e. earn Glory -- which in my experience tends to translate to "this is the first plot they've been involved in." I wouldn't use this as the opening shakedown cruise for new PCs; I'd run one or two other things first, at a minimum.

I do think I need to rejigger the numbers. Not entirely sure how to make it friendly for PCs below Glory 2, though -- either they spend the whole time Idle, in which case it isn't very interesting, or they risk taking a big whack if that one die of damage happens to roll high. I could see treating Status as Reduction for these purposes, but again, that doesn't help new PCs. I'll admit I haven't run MB myself; I assumed an IR1 PC stood too much risk of getting pasted and shouldn't be particiapting in that kind of event, ergo the same should be true here. Is my impression of MB off?

Ah -- whereas I was assuming a) only one application of Reduction and b) the possibility of exploding 10s, which I explicitly ruled out here.

Of course, the old forum is still down for the count, so we can't go and look at what was said the last time this came up. Drat again.

(Does Glory decline from "idleness" still happen? Is your baseline Glory linked to your Insight Rank at all? Etc. etc.)

Yes to both, though idleness cannot make it decay below your Insight Rank.

I could see treating Status as Reduction for these purposes, but again, that doesn't help new PCs.

I'll admit I haven't run MB myself; I assumed an IR1 PC stood too much risk of getting pasted and shouldn't be particiapting in that kind of event, ergo the same should be true here. Is my impression of MB off?

I haven't done a lot of MB, but apart from the damage dice--which are very unlikely to instant-kill you, especially if you have Earth 3 as most any bushi is going to want to do as quickly as possible--most of the heroic opportunities are written to scale to PC power level. In the hands of a clumsy GM it could certainly be deadly (scaling up encounters too far or choosing extreme ones, putting in skirmish opponents who somehow haven't taken battle damage of their own, giving the PCs' side a worse general than the enemy's, continuing to inflict battle damage on Down characters, being a jerk about letting PCs quickly retreat to the Reserves), but that's true of most times in L5R when weapons are drawn. I'd be okay with running a couple of turns of it for an IR1 party with a combat focus, especially if they'd had a little XP to spend by then. (It'd be a bad very-first-session activity, but that's in large part because it's an extra mechanical system to master and because a huge battle should have some IC build-up.)

Speaking of "a couple of turns," I also noticed the MB rules do have a basic rule of thumb for how many rounds a battle should last--"one Turn per 250 troops on each side"--at the end of which presumably whomever had the advantage either for the longest or at the end is the winner. Would "number of participants" or "size of the court where it's taking place" be a useful way of thinking about how many turns a particular Court Battle ought to take?

(Too sleepy to ponder Kitsuki just now, even though they're one of my favorite Courtiers. I'll look better tomorrow--though at first glance it doesn't seem like the feel or practical effects have changed much in this version.)

Just wanted to pop in and say I really like these, am looking forward to seeing where they end up, and gives me an idea of how to rejigger the Kata requirements to something a bit more reasonable.

Keep up the good work

But does it make sense that he's literally incapable of ever convincing anyone of anything important? That's my problem with making it Raise-dependent.

Ah -- but the way you just described it is not accurate to what I'm trying to design here.

1) He can totally convince people of true things, because Raises don't generally come in on Honesty; it's just a rising TN.

2) He can convince people of false things that are relatively plausible . That could be a small lie ("no, my lord, I didn't hear anything last night") or a huge one well-supported by evidence ("I know it's hard to believe, my lord, but your yojimbo killed your husband" when the murder is the culmination of an elaborate and well-executed frame job).

What he can't do is persuade somebody to swallow a really implausible line out of left field -- that takes a lot of Raises, because you're trying to do something extra hard, with an increased risk that you might fail.

Does that make more sense now?

Now, does this depend on the GM adjudicating Raises in a fair and sensible fashion? Yes. But that's true of the Raise mechanic, period, outside the few instances (manuevers, spells) where its use is very numerically delineated. If Raises get used at all in normal (non-technique) social rolls, we're going to have to deal with a degree of GM judgment. My solution there is just to try to be extra-clear about how I'm viewing this, and give lots of examples. I can attempt to be clearer on the Deceit Raises thing in the actual document.

Hmm. That makes sense to me as regards Honesty. The sticking point for me is - our hypothetical Void 2 Sincerity boss can convince people of anything , however difficult to swallow... as long as it's true. If it's a lie, he can only manage trivial things. Does that make sense? If I can successfully convince my lord "I know that you found me standing over your wife's body with her blood all over me and the murder weapon in my hand, but it wasn't me! It was <insert explanation here>" by sheer force of my sincerity when it's true, does it make sense that I be absolutely incapable of wriggling out of exactly the same circumstances with exactly the same explanation if it is instead a lie that I'm making up (assuming exactly the same corroborating evidence or lack thereof)? Handling it with a raised TN/roll penalty for Honesty makes perfect sense to me; why not do the same for Deceit?

Right, but most of those are what the Political Opportunities represent. You do X and impress a potential ally, or put your enemies' allies off their stride, which translates to an effect on the next turn's roll. The only place where I think they need to be treated as independent factions is when their goal is directly opposed to that of the other factions, and that's where my three-way battle idea came in.

And re- inventing the wheel is different from inventing it. ;-) I'm putting a rim on the wheel, maybe, but it already had some spokes. </tortured metaphor>

That's true. But, on the other hand:

a) Representing third parties only in the form of Opportunities that grant single-round bonuses is fine for calling in an individual favour, but I don't think it adequately represents the situation of getting another faction to back your efforts in a sustained way - or of another faction deciding to back your opponents.

b) If you have a system that is capable of representing multiple factions pursuing goals that may or may not bring them into conflict with one another, you can use it to run that sort of scenario - or, if you don't want to bother, you can just run with two factions and let third parties be represented solely by Opportunities. On the other hand, if your system can only represent a small number of factions who are directly in conflict with one another, then if you want to use it to represent a larger and more free-wheeling court... you can't. So a more flexible system seems better to me, without a corresponding downside.

Several of your Opportunities are exactly the kind of thing I was planning! But I broke up "The Great Hunt" -- you can show off your Horsemanship in one Opportunity, or Hunting in another, Animal Handling in a third, and then there's one for a display of weapons, etc.

Yeah, for that one I started with "hmm, Hunting... you go hunting... oh, all these other skills are also needed when out hunting..." You could certainly split it into several narrower ones.

The flip side is that a number of Political Opportunities can also earn you Glory, and a Central character gets one on every roll. But that's where the playtesting comes in, figuring out whether the frequency of that counterbalances the loss. Probably not, and I need to rejigger the numbers, but I haven't had a chance to mess with it yet.

Well, as locust shell points out, few (only a couple, in fact) of the Opportunities you've posted thus far yield Glory. So that's not going to counterbalance the losses from the table in any consistent sort of way.

"Reduction applies more than once" always made a fair bit of sense to me, since Battle Turns are supposed to be about a half-hour long. If you're Heavily Engaged and getting the worst of it, it's rather more intuitive to think that you're suffering many cuts in that time than that someone's hit you exactly once with a well-aimed ballista.

Oh, I agree. But it's a house-rule, not something explicitly laid out in the text, which means not everybody necessarily runs it that way.

Since the forum software won't let me quote everything: yes, your Glory can be actively reduced below IR. It's just that sitting around with your thumb up your posterior will only make people forget about you up to a point. :-)

Off the top of my head, what about using Social Skill Rank? Etiquette, as the perennial social defense skill, would be the obvious choice. That would give Courtiers a bit more of a particular advantage in getting into the thick of things, too.

Hmmmm. Maybe. I'll need to see if I can't find some time to run a few rounds of this and get a feel for how it shakes out with different approaches.

I haven't done a lot of MB, but apart from the damage dice--which are very unlikely to instant-kill you, especially if you have Earth 3 as most any bushi is going to want to do as quickly as possible--most of the heroic opportunities are written to scale to PC power level. In the hands of a clumsy GM it could certainly be deadly (scaling up encounters too far or choosing extreme ones, putting in skirmish opponents who somehow haven't taken battle damage of their own, giving the PCs' side a worse general than the enemy's, continuing to inflict battle damage on Down characters, being a jerk about letting PCs quickly retreat to the Reserves), but that's true of most times in L5R when weapons are drawn. I'd be okay with running a couple of turns of it for an IR1 party with a combat focus, especially if they'd had a little XP to spend by then. (It'd be a bad very-first-session activity, but that's in large part because it's an extra mechanical system to master and because a huge battle should have some IC build-up.)

Maybe it's how we build our characters, but I generally see people popping up to IR2 quite rapidly, especially if one of their first purchases is Earth 3, since that gives +10 Insight. Anyway, this comes down to what exactly each of us means by "new" and "a little XP" and so forth, which isn't really a resolvable question. The underlying point is that I need to fiddle with the numbers some more.

Speaking of "a couple of turns," I also noticed the MB rules do have a basic rule of thumb for how many rounds a battle should last--"one Turn per 250 troops on each side"--at the end of which presumably whomever had the advantage either for the longest or at the end is the winner. Would "number of participants" or "size of the court where it's taking place" be a useful way of thinking about how many turns a particular Court Battle ought to take?

I considered it, but don't really like either of those metrics. I think the real determinant is just how significant/complicated the political conflict is, which doesn't lend itself to quantifiable measurement.

(Too sleepy to ponder Kitsuki just now, even though they're one of my favorite Courtiers. I'll look better tomorrow--though at first glance it doesn't seem like the feel or practical effects have changed much in this version.)

The feel won't change much on any of the schools. It's mechanics that are subject to wholesale revision right now, not the setting. :-)

And now, since I've realized I can quote more than one post without having to fight the forum software . . . .

Just wanted to pop in and say I really like these, am looking forward to seeing where they end up, and gives me an idea of how to rejigger the Kata requirements to something a bit more reasonable.

Keep up the good work

Thanks! If it's any help to you, my own inclination is to make kata activation a Free Action, and then tone down their effects where necessary to fit that greater ease of use. My rationale is this: right now changing kata mid-fight is almost never a good use of a Simple Action, which means that most players will buy one kata they can use all the time, and maybe a backup kata for special circumstances. Result: the vast majority of the kata, especially the more situational ones, never get used. But if they're a Free Action, like ise zumi tattoos, then strategy comes in. We ran on the assumption that you could only perform that Free Action once per round (so you can't switch on an offensive kata/tattoo at the beginning of your turn and then a defensive one at the end of your turn), so when you switch and what you switch to becomes a tactically interesting question. I'm going to try that in my own campaign, with a caveat that the Thousand Years of Steel kata, being so much more powerful, still require a Simple Action.

Hmm. That makes sense to me as regards Honesty. The sticking point for me is - our hypothetical Void 2 Sincerity boss can convince people of anything , however difficult to swallow... as long as it's true. If it's a lie, he can only manage trivial things. Does that make sense? If I can successfully convince my lord "I know that you found me standing over your wife's body with her blood all over me and the murder weapon in my hand, but it wasn't me! It was <insert explanation here>" by sheer force of my sincerity when it's true, does it make sense that I be absolutely incapable of wriggling out of exactly the same circumstances with exactly the same explanation if it is instead a lie that I'm making up (assuming exactly the same corroborating evidence or lack thereof)? Handling it with a raised TN/roll penalty for Honesty makes perfect sense to me; why not do the same for Deceit?

Hmmmm. Stupid truth and lies, making things complicated. :-P

The problem with treating Honesty and Deceit the same is that one of them is a contested roll and the other is not. (And it's divided like that because there is no sensible way for Honesty to be contested -- do you succeed if you beat their Investigation, meaning that Kitsuki are incapable of recognizing the truth? Or do you succeed if their Investigation beats you, meaning the most reliable way to tell the truth is to have no ranks of Sincerity at all? Whereas having Deceit just be against a TN makes the Investigation skill irrelevant; it has to be contested.)

Now, if I weren't determined to be consistent as to what modifiers mean, this might be easier. But I do want to hold onto that if I can, because I'm not laying out a rigid framework of numerical adjustments, which means that GMs have to grasp the underlying principle well enough to apply it themselves -- and that gets badly undermined if the underlying principle isn't consistent. So: the only modifiers that can apply the same to TN-based rolls and contested ones are 1) an adjustment to the agent's dice pool and 2) Raises.

Which means the appropriate thing to do here is to say that both Honesty and Deceit require Raises for you not only to sound like you believe what you're saying, but to make others believe it, too. And the number of Raises depends on the magnitude and plausibility of the thing at hand.

It still isn't *quite* parallel. In Deceit, if you beat the opposing roll but don't call the Raises, they believe you believe what you're saying, but they think you're wrong about it. If you fail your Raises, they think you're lying because you pressed too hard for your lie. (Hmmm -- space in there for a technique like Akodo 5, where you can still base succeed even if you miss your Raises. Back on point now.) Honesty, what sets the TN if it isn't the magnitude/plausibility of what you're saying?

I'll need to think about this some more.

a) Representing third parties only in the form of Opportunities that grant single-round bonuses is fine for calling in an individual favour, but I don't think it adequately represents the situation of getting another faction to back your efforts in a sustained way - or of another faction deciding to back your opponents.

To my way of thinking, "backing your efforts in a sustained way" can be represented one of three ways. We'll illustrate with a conflict from my own campaign, where this system would have been useful: the Owl and the Scorpion were gearing up for war, and trying to maneuver to get other Clans on their side when the conflict itself broke out.

The first way of representing that assistance is to just account for alliance from the start, building that into the numbers for each side. The Phoenix were in the Owl corner all the way, which gave the Owl an edge in the same way that having a couple of Phoenix legions fighting at their side on the battlefield would: more "soldiers," more courtiers running around swaying public opinion to the Owl. As with MB, it's (admittedly) up to the GM to decide what kind of bonus that should look like.

The second way -- which could come in partway through a battle, or be the answer to that hanging question there from way number one -- is to use the mechanics for cooperative rolls. In a sense, each faction is treated as a "person," and they're working together the same way individual characters would. The leading Owl diplomat would therefore get a bonus from the leading Phoenix diplomat, giving them an edge over the Scorpion.

The third and most complicated way is to break up your political conflict into smaller battles. The CB isn't "gain the most support for your side in the upcoming war;" it's "gain the support of the Crane." Fight that one out. Then fight through "gain the support of the Unicorn." Etc. Each alliance won by a given side could give a boost as per the above, but it wouldn't always be a gain; if the Scorpion get Crane support, that might make the Crab more inclined to support the Owl.

On the other hand, if your system can only represent a small number of factions who are directly in conflict with one another, then if you want to use it to represent a larger and more free-wheeling court... you can't.

This was never intended to represent a larger and more free-wheeling court in its entirety. Nor, frankly, would I want it to, because at that point I would feel like I was abstracting the whole "court" thing too far. If, in my above example, the Lion and the Crab also have a dispute going on . . . that's irrelevant to my Owl PCs, except insofar as it may lead to interesting individual scenes, like when one of my PCs realizes she's fated to wind up with a Lion who's about to be engaged to a Crab. I neither need nor want to use CB to adjudicate that. The progress of the Lion-Crab conflict will be based on what I think is sensible for the circumstances and interesting for the game. (The MB analogy here would be using the system to model an entire war, with battles taking place between multiple forces at multiple different spots along a border. The system is only meant to cover one battle; what happens on other battlefields, away from the PCs, is up to the GM.) CB only comes in when there's a specific conflict that a) involves my PCs and b) also involves enough NPCs and enough minor bits of maneuvering that trying to play it all out as actual scenes would bog the story down.

Which isn't to say that you couldn't design a system to model the whole court, possibly using sndwurks' suggestion. But I'm going to keep *this* system focused on a smaller scale.

Well, as locust shell points out, few (only a couple, in fact) of the Opportunities you've posted thus far yield Glory. So that's not going to counterbalance the losses from the table in any consistent sort of way.

See above about needing to tweak numbers. :-)

On the subject of honesty and deceit... I wonder what might be done with instead adjusting on what the "target" character wants to believe or already believes, instead, along with things like blatant evidence.

On the subject of honesty and deceit... I wonder what might be done with instead adjusting on what the "target" character wants to believe or already believes, instead, along with things like blatant evidence.

I was including that under the header of "plausibility," especially since Rokugan isn't much for the forensic end of things. If I know my yojimbo is deeply in debt to some Yasuki merchant, I'm more inclined to believe he betrayed me than if he took a knife meant for me just last week.

Hmm. That makes sense to me as regards Honesty. The sticking point for me is - our hypothetical Void 2 Sincerity boss can convince people of anything , however difficult to swallow... as long as it's true. If it's a lie, he can only manage trivial things. Does that make sense? If I can successfully convince my lord "I know that you found me standing over your wife's body with her blood all over me and the murder weapon in my hand, but it wasn't me! It was <insert explanation here>" by sheer force of my sincerity when it's true, does it make sense that I be absolutely incapable of wriggling out of exactly the same circumstances with exactly the same explanation if it is instead a lie that I'm making up (assuming exactly the same corroborating evidence or lack thereof)? Handling it with a raised TN/roll penalty for Honesty makes perfect sense to me; why not do the same for Deceit?

Hmmmm. Stupid truth and lies, making things complicated. :-P

Truth is always complicated. Liars make things simple!

The problem with treating Honesty and Deceit the same is that one of them is a contested roll and the other is not. (And it's divided like that because there is no sensible way for Honesty to be contested -- do you succeed if you beat their Investigation, meaning that Kitsuki are incapable of recognizing the truth? Or do you succeed if their Investigation beats you, meaning the most reliable way to tell the truth is to have no ranks of Sincerity at all? Whereas having Deceit just be against a TN makes the Investigation skill irrelevant; it has to be contested.)

Now, if I weren't determined to be consistent as to what modifiers mean, this might be easier. But I do want to hold onto that if I can, because I'm not laying out a rigid framework of numerical adjustments, which means that GMs have to grasp the underlying principle well enough to apply it themselves -- and that gets badly undermined if the underlying principle isn't consistent. So: the only modifiers that can apply the same to TN-based rolls and contested ones are 1) an adjustment to the agent's dice pool and 2) Raises.

Which means the appropriate thing to do here is to say that both Honesty and Deceit require Raises for you not only to sound like you believe what you're saying, but to make others believe it, too. And the number of Raises depends on the magnitude and plausibility of the thing at hand.

It still isn't *quite* parallel. In Deceit, if you beat the opposing roll but don't call the Raises, they believe you believe what you're saying, but they think you're wrong about it. If you fail your Raises, they think you're lying because you pressed too hard for your lie. (Hmmm -- space in there for a technique like Akodo 5, where you can still base succeed even if you miss your Raises. Back on point now.) Honesty, what sets the TN if it isn't the magnitude/plausibility of what you're saying?

I'll need to think about this some more.

Why is it necessary that the only modifiers that can apply to both a Contested and non-Contested roll be Raises and modifiers to the dice pool? The 4e corebook is very thin on advice regarding modifiers in general, but if you look through it there's a bunch of flat TN adjustments for various things that apply to both kinds of roll. e.g. Soft-Hearted imposes a +10 to the TNs of all rolls if you kill anyone, Contested or not; Cursed by Tengoku gives you +10 to all TNs in a temple; Failure of Bushido: Courage raises the TN of rolls by 5 while facing scary things; Lame imposes +10 TN to all rolls that involve your legs; Lost Love raises all your TNs by 5 while in effect; and perhaps most relevantly, Disbeliever raises the TN of all social rolls vs shugenja and monks by 5, while Disturbing Countenance raises the TN of all social rolls by 5. Plenty of precedent for applying TN modifiers to an opposed roll without needing to call Raises.

Or - since I see you went through a lot of those disadvantages and changed their effects - make it a flat penalty to the agent's roll. It all comes out the same in the end.

Oh, another relevant consideration (since I'm sure you'll love more complications ): what happens when two people are trying to convince a third party of contradictory things? "My lord, it was not I who murdered your wife, it was your own yojimbo!" "Nonsense! I have ever been your faithful servant! And we found him with the bloody sword in his hand!" Which may involve one using Honesty and one Deceit, or both using Deceit, or both using Honesty. Higher roll wins, modifier for plausibility? Maybe with the target getting confused if the results are too close together?

To my way of thinking, "backing your efforts in a sustained way" can be represented one of three ways. We'll illustrate with a conflict from my own campaign, where this system would have been useful: the Owl and the Scorpion were gearing up for war, and trying to maneuver to get other Clans on their side when the conflict itself broke out.

The first way of representing that assistance is to just account for alliance from the start, building that into the numbers for each side. The Phoenix were in the Owl corner all the way, which gave the Owl an edge in the same way that having a couple of Phoenix legions fighting at their side on the battlefield would: more "soldiers," more courtiers running around swaying public opinion to the Owl. As with MB, it's (admittedly) up to the GM to decide what kind of bonus that should look like.

The second way -- which could come in partway through a battle, or be the answer to that hanging question there from way number one -- is to use the mechanics for cooperative rolls. In a sense, each faction is treated as a "person," and they're working together the same way individual characters would. The leading Owl diplomat would therefore get a bonus from the leading Phoenix diplomat, giving them an edge over the Scorpion.

The third and most complicated way is to break up your political conflict into smaller battles. The CB isn't "gain the most support for your side in the upcoming war;" it's "gain the support of the Crane." Fight that one out. Then fight through "gain the support of the Unicorn." Etc. Each alliance won by a given side could give a boost as per the above, but it wouldn't always be a gain; if the Scorpion get Crane support, that might make the Crab more inclined to support the Owl.

Well, the third option is basically what the sndwurks system does, except that you don't have to work on them in a linear fashion. For your example, the Owl and the Scorpion would presumably each identify potential allies and form the projects "ally with the Crane", "ally with the Crab", etc; for some Clans, both might have forming an alliance as an objective, while for others it might be only one or the other that sees it as a possibility. At any given time, they might be putting their influence towards advancing any one of those, or undermining the other's efforts to build their own alliances. If they get another faction solidly on their side, that faction might then lend its influence to those goals as well, although presumably that faction has its own agendas to pursue and so is unlikely to be as vigorous in its support of the Owl or Scorpion agenda than that Clan itself.

If you're not willing to extend the system to that, though, I think #2 is your best bet. Though I might consider adjusting the co-operative bonus that a faction gives based on circumstances - e.g. the aid of the Otomo delegation ought to be worth more than just their lead diplomat's Politics score, thanks to their very privileged social position. Conversely, the aid of a brilliant Sparrow diplomat might be worth less than it at first seems, just because his entire staff and resources consist of two scribes and this year's yam harvest from three ponds.

This was never intended to represent a larger and more free-wheeling court in its entirety. Nor, frankly, would I want it to, because at that point I would feel like I was abstracting the whole "court" thing too far. If, in my above example, the Lion and the Crab also have a dispute going on . . . that's irrelevant to my Owl PCs, except insofar as it may lead to interesting individual scenes, like when one of my PCs realizes she's fated to wind up with a Lion who's about to be engaged to a Crab. I neither need nor want to use CB to adjudicate that. The progress of the Lion-Crab conflict will be based on what I think is sensible for the circumstances and interesting for the game. (The MB analogy here would be using the system to model an entire war, with battles taking place between multiple forces at multiple different spots along a border. The system is only meant to cover one battle; what happens on other battlefields, away from the PCs, is up to the GM.) CB only comes in when there's a specific conflict that a) involves my PCs and b) also involves enough NPCs and enough minor bits of maneuvering that trying to play it all out as actual scenes would bog the story down.

Which isn't to say that you couldn't design a system to model the whole court, possibly using sndwurks' suggestion. But I'm going to keep *this* system focused on a smaller scale.

It's not really analogous to modelling an entire war, though... it's more like one battlefield that has eight armies operating on it, each fighting some but not all of the others, some of them allied with one another. Or, depending on how you look at it, an extended court conflict of any sort is analogous to a war, and what corresponds to a battle is a court debate of the sort that Emerald Empire attempted (very badly) to model. So I think trying to repurpose the Mass Battle system too directly isn't the way to go.

In any case, my question is - what do you lose by building the system in a way that allows for more factions? I don't think the system gets notably more complicated for it.

-

Returning to individual-scale social mechanics - might I suggest splitting the Temptation emphasis into Bribery and Seduction? Having them together as one skill with different emphases worked in 4E, but I think they are distinct enough that they shouldn't be covered by the same emphasis. Also, I think that there needs to be some provision for discerning someone's motives and desires, ala Doji Coutier 1 and Yasuki Courtier 1 in the current system; I could see Investigation being used to do it through observation (based off Perception or Awareness? Awareness feels like it would fit more, but one doesn't want it to do every **** thing under the sun), and Influence (Manipulation) being used to get someone to reveal it in conversation.

Also, I was thinking some more about the "my position is the only honourable one!" gambit. A couple of thoughts:

a) Within the bounds where it's applicable (i.e. while dealing with people who are deeply concerned about Bushido, or in public where admitting to dishonour can be literally fatal), this is a very powerful thing to be able to do - there's a reason it's a rank 4 technique currently.

b) I think a distinction needs to be made between sincerely convincing someone that your position is honourable, and rhetorically trapping them such that they remain convinced that their position is honourable, but can't say so, and either have to accede to your position or dishonour themselves. The first one is pretty clearly Sincerity. The second would be... Influence (Manipulation)? With the aim of getting them to either agree with your position or commit a breach of etiquette by publicly admitting dishonour? Letting Lore: Bushido complement the roll makes sense either way, I would think, with difficulty modifiers depending on just how out-there your position is - convincing someone that Courage requires them to stand fast in the face of a threat should be pretty easy, but convincing them that Courtesy requires them to pee on their host's favourite bonsai in front of him should be... less so.

I feel like Artisan deserves coverage here too, if Perform is here - art is a classic means of shaping feeling and opinion in real life, and no less so in Rokugan. The difficulty I see, compared to Perform, is that the roll to make e.g. a painting is quite separate from someone viewing the painting... the two could be separated by centuries, potentially.

Regarding Perform - do you think it would work to have every increment of 10 past the (modified) TN count as another Raise for the purpose of affecting someone's feelings? Using Raises for them makes sense - the more ambitious a performance is, the greater the potential for it to fall flat - but I think it also makes sense for a performance that goes particularly well to "overshoot" and affect people more strongly than anticipated.

Lastly - what would the mechanical effects be of using the Perform or Etiquette skills to affect someone's mood or their feelings towards you? An Influence roll to get someone to do a thing is pretty self-explanatory in its effects; a Sincerity roll to get someone to believe a thing is pretty clear. But what does it mean to use Etiquette to get someone to like you, or Perform to make someone feel an emotion? As I've said elsewhere, I quite like the way Exalted 3e handles it and I think it could be adapted very well, but if you have something else in mind already I'd be interested to hear it.

Regarding the reworking of courtier schools - I like what you've done with the Kitsuki, for the most part. The rank 3, in particular, had a ridiculously low TN, and contesting it with Etiquette (Composure) instead makes much more sense. And I love the rank 5 rework. The revised rank 2 feels kind of weak, though, especially if you already have Sage - and I can imagine a lot of Kitsuki buying that. Maybe add a free Precise Memory or Clear Thinker (choose one) or both, with the Ikoma Bard approach of refunding your XP if you have it already?

One thing I'm a little unclear on - in reworking the courtier schools, are you aiming to reduce/eliminate the techs that are "you do this thing that everyone does except better" in favour of more unique abilities? Or are you aiming more to standardise what everyone can do?

Why is it necessary that the only modifiers that can apply to both a Contested and non-Contested roll be Raises and modifiers to the dice pool? The 4e corebook is very thin on advice regarding modifiers in general, but if you look through it there's a bunch of flat TN adjustments for various things that apply to both kinds of roll. e.g. Soft-Hearted imposes a +10 to the TNs of all rolls if you kill anyone, Contested or not; Cursed by Tengoku gives you +10 to all TNs in a temple; Failure of Bushido: Courage raises the TN of rolls by 5 while facing scary things; Lame imposes +10 TN to all rolls that involve your legs; Lost Love raises all your TNs by 5 while in effect; and perhaps most relevantly, Disbeliever raises the TN of all social rolls vs shugenja and monks by 5, while Disturbing Countenance raises the TN of all social rolls by 5. Plenty of precedent for applying TN modifiers to an opposed roll without needing to call Raises.

Or - since I see you went through a lot of those disadvantages and changed their effects - make it a flat penalty to the agent's roll. It all comes out the same in the end.

That's the 4e system; I'm talking about my own setup for modifiers, as described in the original post. (Ke: Kinzen edition. <g>) 4e got wildly inconsistent about how it approached those kinds of things, handing out different modifiers in different situations without much of a discernible system for what each kind was supposed to represent. I'm trying to be more organized about it -- especially since a core principle here is that the rules cannot possibly describe every type of situation that might occur and what the numerical effect of those circumstances should be, ergo the GM is going to have to make judgment calls. Consistency regarding the significance of a modifier is (imho) necessary to creating a framework where the GM's calls can be seen as something other than arbitrary.

So, from my (Ke) perspective: speaking of a TN adjustment to a contested roll is a misnomer. Yes, the other person's roll is the number you have to beat, but the actual adjustment there is a bonus or malus to their total, which in my approach carries a specific IC meaning. Ergo, rolls against static TNs and rolls against another character cannot be treated as wholly equivalent.

It comes out the same in the end . . . but I'm convinced the road by which you arrive there matters, from the perspective of system coherence and GM adjudication.

Oh, another relevant consideration (since I'm sure you'll love more complications ): what happens when two people are trying to convince a third party of contradictory things? "My lord, it was not I who murdered your wife, it was your own yojimbo!" "Nonsense! I have ever been your faithful servant! And we found him with the bloody sword in his hand!" Which may involve one using Honesty and one Deceit, or both using Deceit, or both using Honesty. Higher roll wins, modifier for plausibility? Maybe with the target getting confused if the results are too close together?

For starters, you've got three rolls there: one Honesty, one Deceit, one Investigation. It doesn't matter whether Deceit beats Honesty if Investigation beats Deceit; the lord will suss out the lie, rather than just believing the higher total.

Whether he believes the other person or not, I can't say until I know for sure how I want to handle the previous issue.

If you're not willing to extend the system to that, though, I think #2 is your best bet. Though I might consider adjusting the co-operative bonus that a faction gives based on circumstances - e.g. the aid of the Otomo delegation ought to be worth more than just their lead diplomat's Politics score, thanks to their very privileged social position. Conversely, the aid of a brilliant Sparrow diplomat might be worth less than it at first seems, just because his entire staff and resources consist of two scribes and this year's yam harvest from three ponds.

This is where the MB model, and the CB analogue, both depend on GM judgment calls. Quoth the core book: "GMs may modify the results of this roll based on numerical advantage, terrain, weather conditions, successful Heroic Opportunities in previous Battle Turns, or any of a litany of other factors as they see fit." Yes, it's fuzzy. It's a larger-scale version of the general social roll fuzziness, e.g. "there is no cut-and-dried modifier for the fact that you embarrassed this guy last week and so he's uninclined to help you with your problem." The effect of Otomo backing, like a conveniently-placed river that protects your army's left flank, has to be measured off the cuff.

As for the war/battle analogy: my point is, the whole court is a larger thing than this is intended to deal with. You can't "win" court; you can only win an objective within it.

In any case, my question is - what do you lose by building the system in a way that allows for more factions? I don't think the system gets notably more complicated for it.

With all due respect to sndwurks, what I remember of his proposed system didn't really float my boat. I like the fact that Court Battle makes use of a skill and a Trait that's about intelligent maneuvering rather than personal likeability; I like the fact that it gives a way to build in specific RP scenes that lay a framework for later interactions, or give PCs a chance to use skills that are rarely relevant otherwise, which then has a direct effect on the progress of the battle. The other system reminds me a lot of the Influence system used in Vampire LARPs, which I frankly do not like at all.

I'm not sure what you mean by the system not getting notably more complicated with more factions-- what exactly do you envision when you say that?

Re: Temptation -> Seduction and Bribery

I was on the verge of polling the commentariat on that very topic. Yeah, my inclination is to divide it. Sure, that means Influence has a lot of emphases, but whatever.

Also, I think that there needs to be some provision for discerning someone's motives and desires, ala Doji Coutier 1 and Yasuki Courtier 1 in the current system; I could see Investigation being used to do it through observation (based off Perception or Awareness? Awareness feels like it would fit more, but one doesn't want it to do every **** thing under the sun), and Influence (Manipulation) being used to get someone to reveal it in conversation.

I use Investigation (Interrogation) for that, yes, though Manipulation could be used as setup for the Investigation roll, provoking the target into displaying their inner thoughts more clearly. (If anybody has a good name for the "read people's body language" emphasis, I might split Interrogation off as covering the actual systematic questioning of a person.) I continually waffle about Perception vs Awareness, for exactly the reason you gave; right now my solution is the aji that lets you add your Awareness to the Perception-based roll. Maybe a more advanced aji would let you do a Trait swap.

Re: the Honor-gambit thing

I'm not sure how I want to handle that. Part of me inclines toward making it just Lore: Bushido / Awareness, on the grounds that if you don't really understand the code, you cannot possibly make a convincing case. But I haven't really put together any solid thoughts yet.

I feel like Artisan deserves coverage here too, if Perform is here - art is a classic means of shaping feeling and opinion in real life, and no less so in Rokugan. The difficulty I see, compared to Perform, is that the roll to make e.g. a painting is quite separate from someone viewing the painting... the two could be separated by centuries, potentially.

Plus the artwork can have its effect again and again and again, rather than happening and then being done. I haven't yet thought of a good way to handle Artisan yet. >_< All I know is that I don't think "mood" should be its primary effect; you're really unlikely to say "man, that origami makes me feel so sad" or "that's a seriously angry-looking bonsai." <g>

Regarding Perform - do you think it would work to have every increment of 10 past the (modified) TN count as another Raise for the purpose of affecting someone's feelings? Using Raises for them makes sense - the more ambitious a performance is, the greater the potential for it to fall flat - but I think it also makes sense for a performance that goes particularly well to "overshoot" and affect people more strongly than anticipated.

It comes back to what Raises mean. To me, a Perform roll with a high total but few Raises is executed with great technical skill, but it isn't all that moving. I'm not sure I want to cross the streams by having it be *both* Raises *and* scalar success at the same time. (But I do have a house rule for all rolls that if you triple your TN, you get some appropriate extra benefit.)

Lastly - what would the mechanical effects be of using the Perform or Etiquette skills to affect someone's mood or their feelings towards you? An Influence roll to get someone to do a thing is pretty self-explanatory in its effects; a Sincerity roll to get someone to believe a thing is pretty clear. But what does it mean to use Etiquette to get someone to like you, or Perform to make someone feel an emotion? As I've said elsewhere, I quite like the way Exalted 3e handles it and I think it could be adapted very well, but if you have something else in mind already I'd be interested to hear it.

I think I missed the Exalted example, or it just slipped my mind. Refresh my memory? I only remember mechanics for resisting influence, which doesn't help measure the effects of that influence in the first place.

My own answer there is that not everything can be translated into mechanical effects, at least not without complicating the system beyond what I think ought to be basic skill mechanics. The only reason I put actual numbers on Intimidation is because that's one of the classic areas where players often resist going along with the dice results, and/or think failing the roll equates to mind control of their PC; giving a clear-cut mechanical effect works better in that regard. But "this NPC feels more friendly toward you" or "you've made him sad" is hard to quantify in any way that I'm happy with. (Possibly your Exalted comparison will change my mind, though.)

Regarding the reworking of courtier schools - I like what you've done with the Kitsuki, for the most part. The rank 3, in particular, had a ridiculously low TN, and contesting it with Etiquette (Composure) instead makes much more sense. And I love the rank 5 rework. The revised rank 2 feels kind of weak, though, especially if you already have Sage - and I can imagine a lot of Kitsuki buying that. Maybe add a free Precise Memory or Clear Thinker (choose one) or both, with the Ikoma Bard approach of refunding your XP if you have it already?

I was having problems with those two ranks, and then I remembered an idea I'd had ages ago. Reworked version is below; let me know what you think!

One thing I'm a little unclear on - in reworking the courtier schools, are you aiming to reduce/eliminate the techs that are "you do this thing that everyone does except better" in favour of more unique abilities? Or are you aiming more to standardise what everyone can do?

My aims are fourfold:

1) Swap out skills where necessary to fit the new system.

2) Replace instances where a tech allowed you to do a thing that really ought to have been a basic skill use available to everybody. (Hey, the Ide can use Etiquette (Courtesy) to avoid putting their foot in their mouths! What the &@#$! is that skill for, if not that purpose?)

3) Minimize "you can do X better" techs that solely amount to "throw more dice at it." Those are okay in moderation, but especially as R5 techs, feel a little disappointing. I prefer to link the bonus to another skill, or allow for a different (more favorable) Trait, or have the bonus be created through the use of a preparatory roll, or *something* that gives it flavor.

4) Implement unique abilities that I think fit the flavor of the school really well. Many of these amount to what I see as missed opportunities on the part of the DT.

The standardization really happens on the level of the skills, laying out what the basic uses of them are, so that techs can play with those effects in one way or another. I like unique abilities, but I'm not trying to build five ranks' worth of them for every school; I'm aiming for a mix of "you do this better/more easily/in a way that favors your build" and "nobody else can do this at all."

And now, the reworked Kitsuki:

KITSUKI INVESTIGATOR

Skills: Etiquette (Composure), Influence, Investigation (Interrogation), Kenjutsu, Meditation, Sincerity, any one Lore Skill

Rank 1: +1k0 per School Rank to Investigation. Clear Thinker, or points refunded if you already have it. You roll Perception in place of Awareness when using Lore: Bushido to gauge someone’s Honor Rank, and may call Raises to detect the Perceived Honor Advantage (one rank per Raise).

Rank 2: Bonus against Feint and Disarm is the same; also, ATN bonus from the original R1.

Rank 3: roll is contested Investigation (Interrogation) / Perception vs Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower.

Rank 4: using the tech takes a day of asking around court, but the roll is Investigation (Interrogation) / Awareness at TN 20, rather than contested. Each increment of 5 over the TN gets you another name, but allies/enemies who are making an effort to conceal the connection may require an increment of 10, at GM's discretion. (Ditched Raises because you're not likely to overlook one ally because you were trying to find two.)

Rank 5: If you beat someone in a contested roll of your Investigation (Interrogation) / Perception against their Sincerity (Deceit) / Awareness with a margin of at least 10, you may spend a VP to automatically sniff out their lies for the remainder of the scene. (The idea is that once you've seen through the mask, you've got their number.)

AHAHAHAHAH, I think I finally have a way to deal with Artisan! (By "deal with" I mean a way to make it do something more specifically useful than just make pretty things, a la the benefit I've given to Perform. If this is the kind of thing every good courtier is expected to practice, then it ought to do something socially useful.)

Train of thought went like this. As I said before, I don't think mood is the main effect a piece of artwork has (especially when we're talking about Rokugani artwork, which includes things like ikebana or bonsai); it's more the kind of thing you peacefully contemplate for a time. And it could theoretically have its effect repeatedly, which is more like Craft. But the division between Craft and Artisan is that the former makes items for practical use, and the latter just for aesthetic value --

My epiphany was, I think I'm defining "use" too narrowly in my head.

So the idea is: as with Craft (which, when I get around to it, will have a system kind of like the one from Secrets of the Empire , except built in from the start rather than bolted on after the fact), you can call Raises on your Artisan roll to give a particular quality to your artwork, which is conveyed when a character spends some time studying the artwork. Let me say up front that I haven't attached numbers to any of this yet; I don't know how many Raises would be required for each quality, nor how big the effect would be (I'm assuming these will be very minor). Also, there would need to be a limiter on frequency of use to avoid the owner of the artwork from just spamming it constantly for the benefit. But this is the kind of thing I mean by "effect":

Contemplative -- especially peaceful; character gains a Void Point

Pleasing -- especially well-made; when the piece is presented as a gift, the giver may add a bonus to one social roll against the recipient later that scene

Flattering -- depicts something nice about a particular faction; anyone from that faction who studies it is at a penalty to their next roll to resist being influenced

Partisan -- depicts something nice about a particular faction; the next person from that faction who makes a social roll against the target gains a bonus

Edifying -- depicts a particular subject, e.g. religion or a battle; grants a minor bonus to the next roll made with the relevant skill

Now picking the artwork that will sit in the tokonoma during your tea ceremony or the images painted on the fusuma of your audience chamber becomes a really important decision. A little common sense would need to apply -- it's hard to think of how an ikebana arrangement could be Edifying on the topic of Sailing -- but I think I like the general shape of this.

EDITED TO ADD: and before anybody says "but this is stepping on the toes of the Asahina Fetishist path" -- the point I made back on the old forum is that if you design artisan techniques without first thinking through the basic use of the skills, you end up with a mess. In this scenario, Asahina Fetishists will be able to do a better/more magical version of the ordinary effect, so the path is still worth taking.

I have many thoughts on your previous post in the works, but for now I just want to say - this Artisan rework is genius. Kudos. It makes Artisan socially useful and opens up tons more design space for Artisan schools.

Another example of an Artisan effect that springs to mind:

Disparaging -- depicts something negative about a particular faction. The target gains a bonus to his or her next roll to resist being influenced by a member of that faction.

Yeah, now Artisan schools/paths can get a (meaningful) Free Raise, or make the benefit stronger, or make something that gives the benefit to more than one subsequent roll -- and that's before I even try to think about what unique effects their techs might have.

Here's another school rework:

ASAKO LOREMASTER

Skills: Etiquette (Courtesy), Influence, Lore: Theology, Meditation, Sincerity (Honesty), Spellcraft, any Lore skill

(I've expanded Spellcraft to also cover the terrain of Lore: Shugenja and Lore: Nemuranai. Though I'd love to come up with a different name for it.)

Rank One - Sage Advantage (my version thereof), or an additional +1k0 when you have ranks if you already have the advantage. When rolling Etiquette (Composure) to resist the Influence or Sincerity (Flattery) skills, you substitute your Intelligence for your Willpower on the roll.

Rank Two - Same as before, but reskinned to use Meditation / Perception instead of Lore: History, on the grounds that history is the Ikoma schtick and the Phoenix have a more religious bent.

Rank Three - Same as before, but reskinned to use Lore: Theology / Intelligence instead of Lore: History, for the same reasons as above.

Rank Four - You may roll a Lore skill relevant to the situation at hand, using the Awareness Trait, against your opponent’s Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower. If your target has ranks in the same Lore skill, they may add those to the total of their roll. Success means you gain a number of bonus kept dice equal to your rank in that Lore, which you may use on contested Social Skill rolls or Sincerity (Honesty) rolls against that target. You may not use more than one bonus die on any given roll, and any unused dice are lost at the end of the scene.

Rank Five - At this rank, the Asako demolish opponents whose wisdom is less than their own. If you fail a contested Social Skill roll, you may immediately spend a Void Point to force your opponent to re-roll, using the Intelligence Trait in place of the original Trait. You may use this technique a number of times per day equal to your School Rank.

Going by techniques, I have a bunch of schools that have been nearly done for a while: 80% of the Yasuki techs, 80% of the Ikoma, 60% of the Yoritomo, 60% of the Ide. But I just moved the Bayushi from "barely started" into "ready to go", so they're the next to be posted. :-)

Fair warning: I consider the 4e Bayushi to be absurdly overpowered. (If you have any Mental or Social Disadvantages, they get at least one Free Raise against you, plus Blackmail, which means your tens don't explode against them, and also you're rolling your weakest Trait. Basically: you're toast.) This version may look a lot weaker -- well, it is -- but I think that's a good thing. The flavor is all still here; it's just been toned down.

BAYUSHI COURTIER

Skills: Calligraphy, Etiquette, Influence (Manipulation), Investigation, Politics, Sincerity (Deceit), any one High Skill

Rank One - the original R2, plus a Free Raise on Sincerity (Deceit).

Rank Two - Investigation (Interrogation) / Awareness vs. Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower, with a Raise, to learn one M/S Disad. Can roll a second time to learn a new Disad, but must call an additional Raise with each subsequent digging operation. The Disad revealed won't be anything publicly obvious, like "oh hey that ronin is a ronin."

Rank Three -- the part of the original R4 about making them use a different Trait, sans the "Blackmail/your tens don't explode" part.

Rank Four -- When speaking with a target you know possesses a Mental or Social Disadvantage, you may roll Influence (Manipulation) / Awareness against their Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower. Success means you are able to use your knowledge as leverage over your target, gaining +1k1 on contested Social Skill rolls against them, plus an additional unkept die for every Disadvantage known to you beyond the first. This effect lasts until the end of the scene.

Rank Five -- inflict Infamous, Obligation, or Sworn Enemy by rolling Influence (Manipulation) against a TN equal to target's Glory x5 plus Status x5. Can only be done once per month, but effect is lasting (instead of wearing off, as it does in the original tech). Significant failure, i.e. missing your TN by 10 or more, earns you one point of Infamy per rank of Glory and Status the target possesses.

And then after I posted that last night, the Ikoma R5 fell into place for me, so here are the kitty cats!

IKOMA BARD

Skills: Etiquette, Lore: Bushido, Lore: History (Lion Clan), Perform: Storytelling, Sincerity (Honesty), any one High Skill, any one Bugei Skill

Rank One - usual mechanics, with a few tweaks. You can Raise to grant additional points of Glory to the target. A single target cannot benefit from the tech more than once per month, and you get no Glory for yourself when storytelling to brag on someone else's behalf (because it's about them, not you).

Rank Two - +1k0 per School Rank on Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower rolls against the Bribery, Intimidation, and Seduction emphases of the Influence skill.

Rank Three - Perform: Storytelling instead of Lore: History. Two Raises lets them add the bonus to a second roll in the battle or skirmish. Debating whether this should also work in duels or not, as I'm inclined to make an Honor bonus to dueling be part of the standard mechanics (so this tech would mean you add double your Honor rank to one roll).

Rank Four - unchanged

Rank Five - Although daily life would seem to prove them wrong, the Ikoma believe every samurai possesses the capacity to become honorable. Masters of the school are able to give a brief glimpse of this inner light to others, strengthening them against the temptations of the world. When you employ this technique, you temporarily raise your target’s Honor by 1.0. (This technique cannot be used on targets whose Honor is above 9.0, nor those who have no Honor rating at all, such as nonhumans.) Activating this technique requires a Lore: Bushido / Awareness roll at a TN equal to 15 plus the character’s real Honor Rank x5. The effect lasts until a full day passes or the character sleeps, whichever comes first; when it ends, the target’s temporary Honor is reduced by 1.0. While the technique is in effect, the character uses their temporary rating for most mechanical effects, including Fear, resisting the Low emphases of Influence, and Lore: Bushido / Awareness rolls. Any Honor losses they suffer are calculated according to the temporary rating, as their ennobled spirit feels more keenly the stain of dishonorable action. Any Honor gains, however, are calculated according to their real rating, plus the target gains an additional point.

I find it amusing that although the Yasuki were the first school I finished working on, I keep not posting them because I'm not quite happy with what I have. Mostly because working on some of the other schools made me realize I could be a little more ambitious with tech replacement than I was on that first pass. :-)

Anyway, onward to the Mantis! My central goal here was to make the Yoritomo a bit less of the one-note wonders they are in 4e. (Extra Willpower for bullying people! If you fail Sincerity, just bully people! Bully people so they can't do anything against you! Bonus dice when bullying people!) They're still bullies here; they just have a little more variety.

YORITOMO BULLY COURTIER

Skills: Commerce (Appraisal), Defense, Etiquette, Influence (Intimidation), Politics, Sincerity, any one Merchant or Lore skill

Rank One - +1k1 to social rolls with lawless types, rather than more Free Raises than you'll ever need. :-P Otherwise, as per usual, plus you don't gain Infamy if you fail to make your Raises on an Influence (Intimidation) roll.

Rank Two - The wealth of the Yoritomo is their greatest asset, figuratively as well as literally. Any time you give a gift, arrange entertainment, or otherwise attempt to ingratiate yourself in a context where money is a relevant factor, you may choose to roll Commerce / Awareness instead of Etiquette (Courtesy) Awareness. This use of the skill costs you one point of Glory, though, plus one per Raise called, as your crass display of wealth lowers you in the eyes of samurai society.

Rank Three - The Yoritomo are trained not to let anything stand in their way. When rolling Influence (Manipulation), Influence (Bribery), or Politics (Negotiation), you may use the Willpower Trait instead of Awareness.

Rank Four - An experienced Mantis retains his aura of menace even when he chooses his words poorly. When you call Raises on an Influence (Intimidation) roll, if you meet or exceed the original TN (before Raises) but fail to meet the Raised TN, you still succeed without the benefit of Raises.

Rank Five - Masters of the Yoritomo school know how to spread their unorthodox behaviors to others, disrupting the usual order of Rokugani society. When conversing with someone, you may roll Influence (Manipulation) against the target’s Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower; they may add their Honor Rank to the total of their roll. If you succeed, you inflict one of the following Disadvantages on your target: Brash, Contrary, or Overconfident. If the target already possesses that Disadvantage, this technique increases their TN to resist its effects by 10. This lasts for one hour. You may use this technique multiple times on a single target, choosing a different Disadvantage each time, but you may not inflict the same Disadvantage on them more than once per day.

Sometimes I'm not in design gear; sometimes I am. Saying that about the Yasuki finally inspired me to finish them off (and gave me a notion for an aji to boot).

YASUKI COURTIER

Skills: Commerce, Defense, Etiquette, Influence (Bribery), Politics, Sincerity (Deceit), any one Merchant or Bugei skill

Rank One - the usual, except it's +1k1 instead of a Free Raise on Commerce, and you roll against their Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower. Also, you may roll Commerce in place of Politics (Negotiation) when making any deal involving money or material goods.

Rank Two - As ruthless merchants, the Yasuki are also skilled at resisting the blandishments of others. You gain bonus unkept dice equal to your School Rank on Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower rolls against Sincerity (Flattery), Influence (Bribery), and Influence (Seduction).

Rank Three - The Yasuki often use less-than-savory tactics to reach their goals, and have learned to dodge the consequences of this fact. When you fail a Sincerity (Deceit), Influence (Intimidation), or Influence (Bribery) roll, you may immediately make an Influence (Manipulation) roll against your target. Success means you distract your target from your misstep, negating the social and mechanical consequences of your failure. You still lose Honor for Low use of Sincerity or Influence, however, and if your second roll also fails, you lose a point of Glory.

Rank Four - If you obtain a rare or especially useful item for someone, you gain a number of bonus kept dice based on the difficulty of the search (one bonus die per 5 TN above 10), which may be spent to enhance any Social Skill roll involving your target, whether it is contested or not. You cannot spend more than your School Rank in bonus dice on any one roll, and any unused dice expire after one month.

Rank Five - Most samurai cling to the illusion that they are above material concerns, which makes them easy targets for Yasuki manipulation. Masters of this school may call upon their connections to impoverish another samurai, gaining leverage over him in the process. Using this technique requires a number of days equal to the starting koku in the target’s school outfit; the Wealthy Advantage and Daikoku’s Curse Disadvantage adjust this number as appropriate, while the Ascetic Disadvantage reduces the time required by half. At the end of this period, you may roll Commerce / Intelligence against a TN of 20, plus 5 for each rank of the Commerce skill your target possesses. Success means you inflict a minor Debt Disadvantage on them. Inflicting a major Debt doubles the time and requires three Raises, while inflicting a crippling Debt requires five. The target may pay off this debt by any means available to them, at which point the Disadvantage goes away. You may not use this technique on the same target more than once per season, but you may attempt to renew or deepen their obligation if the original debt has not been paid off by the following season. Doing so reduces the necessary Raises by one with each consecutive use of the technique.

Since it's relevant: this is basically the Debt Disadvantage from Imperial Archives, with the added details that a) your creditor can require you to help them out, though not to the point of risking your Honor (think 1-point Devotion Ally level), and b) if your debt becomes public knowledge, you lose Glory, with the amount dependent on the scale of the Debt.

(And yes, I've noticed that my mechanics are introducing a ton of ways to lose Glory, but relatively few new ways to earn it. I'm aware of that, and will keep it in mind if/when I playtest this stuff.)

The more I read this, the more I want to work on a whole cloth restructuring of L5R RPG.

But at that point, I realize I would just be making a fan version of 5th Edition when we have no idea what the next version of L5R RPG will be like, if there is even one. Maybe one day....

In other words, keep making awesome stuff, Kinzen. And I hope that this is getting saved somewhere other than a forum.

The more I read this, the more I want to work on a whole cloth restructuring of L5R RPG.

But at that point, I realize I would just be making a fan version of 5th Edition when we have no idea what the next version of L5R RPG will be like, if there is even one. Maybe one day....

In other words, keep making awesome stuff, Kinzen. And I hope that this is getting saved somewhere other than a forum.

Yeah, I think we learned the hard way not to count on a forum for sustained access to anything.

The more I read this, the more I want to work on a whole cloth restructuring of L5R RPG.

But at that point, I realize I would just be making a fan version of 5th Edition when we have no idea what the next version of L5R RPG will be like, if there is even one.

What do you think I'm in the middle of doing? Seriously, I recognize this has gone well past "house rules" and into "Kinzen's Fifth Edition." Without me knowing whether I'll ever even use it. But it's a way to entertain myself while we wait; I figure I'll finish going through the basic courtier schools, then start poking at shugenja while I'm at my in-laws' over Christmas (since we have all the spells in a spreadsheet, which means I can fiddle with* them while I'm away from the books). I think my bushi/combat revisions would be less extensive, since the only foundational overhaul I find myself contemplating would be to throw out "rounds" and make it a tick-based system instead, but hey, if I'm going to revamp courtiers and rebuild shugenja from the ground up, why not polish up the last pillar while I'm at it?

(. . . I need help. Of the therapy sort.)

And yes, this is all saved on my hard drive. Definitely learned *that* lesson.

After a trough of time in which I went off and worked my way through a goodly portion of the non-standard courtier schools (MC, Imperial, Spider, Owl), I've finally figured out at least a draft for the Ide. They and the Doji both suffered badly in 4e from techniques that really ought to have been universal courtier abilities combined with "eh, just throw more dice at it," so it took me a while to find suitable angles on their flavor -- you'll note that what I've posted below is almost 100% new material, rather than a rework of the original techs.

Doji should be up soon after this one; I just need to finish their R5.

IDE EMISSARY

Skills: Calligraphy, Commerce, Etiquette (Courtesy), Horsemanship, Investigation, Sincerity (Honesty), any one High skill

Rank One - The Unicorn have often faced cultural differences in their political dealings, and so the first lesson of the Ide is to adapt to their surroundings. When interacting with a group foreign to you (such as a different clan or a gaijin delegation), you may roll Etiquette (Courtesy) / Perception at TN 15 to attune yourself to their customs. Doing so grants you a temporary rank of the appropriate Lore (such as Lore: Crane Clan or Lore: Yobanjin), which stacks with any ranks you may already possess. If your roll meets a TN of 25, then you also gain +1k1 to all Etiquette (Courtesy) and Etiquette (Insult) rolls when dealing with a member of that group. You must be interacting with multiple individuals from a single group for this technique to work; an individual on their own does not give you enough to observe. This benefit lasts as long as you are still interacting with that group on a regular basis, but if you spend a full day away from them, you must roll again to renew the benefit. You may have simultaneously active benefits for a number of groups equal to your School Rank.

Rank Two - The Ide must often defuse tense situations, and can even use their peaceable ways to make others look crude. When targeted with an Etiquette (Insult) roll, you may respond with Etiquette (Courtesy) instead of another insult. If you meet or exceed the total on your opponent’s roll, the exchange brings no loss of Glory for you. If you successfully call two Raises on your roll, your gracious reply shames your opponent; they lose one point of Glory, and an additional point each time they make an Insult roll against you for the remainder of the scene. You also gain +1k1 when rolling Investigation (Interrogation) to determine someone’s true feelings.

Rank Three - On many occasions during the wanderings of the Unicorn, the intervention of the Ide has been the only thing which prevented diplomatic disaster, especially when their less-polished brethren are the ones talking. A number of times per day equal to your School Rank, you may offer your advice to one willing ally. This allows your ally to use your own Etiquette (Courtesy) / Awareness in place of their own for a single roll made before the end of that day. You are not speaking on behalf of that ally; this technique may therefore be used in situations where you are not directly involved, such as when an Utaku Battle Maiden is speaking to her sensei, or the Moto family daimyo is greeting an important guest.

Rank Four - Ide who spend enough time in court develop an almost preternatural sense for impending trouble. Once per day, when you or your immediate allies are targeted with a hostile social effort (such as Etiquette (Insult), Influence (Intimidation), or simply an attempt to make you look bad in court), you may roll Investigation (Interrogation) / Awareness against the ringleader’s Sincerity (Deceit) / Awareness to determine whether your character anticipated the problem. Your Rank Two benefit applies to this roll. If you succeed, you gain +1k1 on all Social skill rolls made to address the issue. This effect lasts until the end of the scene.

Rank Five - The Ide are unsurpassed for their ability to make connections quickly. So long as your intentions are genuine, you may roll Sincerity (Honesty) in place of Etiquette (Courtesy) to earn the trust and goodwill of a neutral or friendly individual. Furthermore, you may call two Raises on your roll to turn your target into a temporary ally. For the next full day, the target will go out of their way to assist you, although they will not risk their honor to do so. This technique may not be used against a Sworn Enemy or anyone else already fixed in a hostile attitude toward you. The GM determines whether this technique is effective against nonhuman creatures such as Naga or Nezumi.

And finally, the Doji! It seems weird that I left the quintessential courtiers until last . . . but it was actually easier to sort out the schools that had very distinctive angles on the concept of "courtier," and then look at the core, than the other way around.

As with the Ide, this is basically a wholesale re-do, with the flavor kept but very little of the specific mechanics.

DOJI COURTIER

Skills: Calligraphy, Etiquette (Courtesy), Investigation, Influence, Politics, Sincerity (Flattery), any one Artisan or Perform skill

Rank One: The Soul of Honor
So long as you maintain your Honor Rank at 6.0 or higher, you may add your Honor Rank to the total of any Etiquette, Politics, or Sincerity roll. You may do this a number of times per day equal to your School Rank. Also, by conversing with another person for a few minutes, you can make a contested roll of Investigation (Interrogation) / Awareness against the target’s Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower to discreetly learn whether they are in need of any favors or assistance (such as travel papers to reach another province).

Rank Two:
The core principle of the Doji school is to work in harmony with others, both within the clan and without. You gain the Cadence of Allies aji, even if you do not meet the requirements, and you may have it active at all times, even when another aji is also active. You may spend a Void Point on a Politics roll to add bonus unkept dice equal to the number of your Allies currently present at court. (If you have succeeded on the agent roll{1} for an absent Ally, this counts toward your total.)

Rank Three: The Perfect Gift
The Doji build their networks of alliances through gifts, offering others what they need so that in the future the Doji may rely on their assistance. If someone accepts a gift or a political favor from you and you succeed in an Etiquette (Courtesy) / Awareness roll at TN 25, you gain +1k1 to your Etiquette, Influence, Politics, and Sincerity rolls involving that target for the remainder of the scene. Etiquette (Insult) and Influence (Intimidation) rolls do not gain this bonus, and cancel this technique’s effects if used.

Rank Four: The Gardener’s Way
Just as a gardener must prepare the earth before planting if he wishes his flowers to thrive, the Doji learn to prepare the way for their political efforts. When you make a Sincerity (Flattery) roll against another character, if you successfully call two Raises on your roll, you lay the groundwork for good relations, gaining one re-roll you may use on any Social skill roll involving your target. This re-roll must be used before the end of the scene, or it is lost. You may only keep one re-roll per character in reserve at a time, but once you have spent it, you may use this technique again.

Rank Five:
Lady Doji’s vision of court was that it should be a place of elegant civility, and the masters of the Doji school strive to make her vision a reality. Once per session, you may spend a Void Point and roll Influence (Manipulation) / Awareness, adding your Honor Rank to this total. Any character (yourself included) who wishes to make Low use of a Social skill in your immediate presence, whether targeting you or not, must roll Etiquette (Composure) / Willpower, subtracting their Honor Rank from their total. If they succeed, this technique has no effect on them, but if they fail, they suffer a -XkX penalty to all Low Social rolls, where X is half your Honor Rank (rounded down). This effect lasts until the end of the scene. Other characters feel the weight of your disapproval, and are aware when this technique is used.

{1} The way I'll probably do Allies is a hybrid of the 4e core and Unexpected Allies versions: you pay XP equal to the Status Rank of the Ally, plus 1/3/5 for increasing Devotion (with a minimum of 1). When you travel away from your Ally, you can roll a d10 to see if they or somebody connected to them is present in your location; if you choose, you can pay the cost of the Ally multiple times to roll more d10s.