Greetings from the Sands, Evil-Smelling Brother-in-Law of a Camel!

We already had several similar topics on a number of forum.

There is usually two factions:

- the "magical samurai" school who prefer an idealized and shiny Rokugan.

- the "grim and gritty" players who embrace the dirty side of the world.

On the whole, i feel the honor chart is a good tool.

Bushido as presented in L5R is inherently self-contradictory. The tenets can and do contradict. It is very possible for characters to disagree in good faith as to the proper course of action.

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

E: of course, re-reading the opening section of the 4th ed core book reminds me just how much of Rokugani culture is built on ignoring Honesty, so... there's that.

Needless to say, I agree with you about the inherent contradictions within Bushido- much as a samurai might strive to follow all the Tenets, and much as they might believe themselves to be following the only right way, it's ultimately impossible to satisfy all obligations in every situation.

Your post reminded me of another interesting aspect of the tenets of Bushido, though: Gi is Justice as well as Honesty, and the two are inextricably linked in Leadership :

Be acutely honest throughout your dealings with all people. Believe in justice, not from other people, but from yourself. To a true Samurai, there is no shades of gray in the question of honesty and justice. There is only right and wrong.

Leaving aside, for now, the fact that justice itself is left undefined (at least for us, out of character- in-setting, it might be the case that Akodo-Kami went on to elucidate what was meant by 'justice'), and the question of how justice can be derived from oneself, when it is formally derived from the say-so of the Emperor, it's not at all clear how and why Honesty and Justice should be combined in this way. In short, Bushido is not short on philosophical oddities even at its most basic level, so it's not surprising that it should occasionally be contradictory.

Another point raised by this quote is the emphasis in Leadership on bipolar ethics. Duty is also described as being "all or nothing, black or white" . This, for me, is another reason for keeping track of virtues separately, by whatever mechanic. True though it may be (and often is) that there is no wholly satisfactory solution, and that choosing any course of action will require a loss in some virtue, even if that loss is outweighed by the gain in another, Leadership itself is emphatic on the point that, when it comes to ethical conduct, there is no room for excuses or compromises, and any failure of a given virtue is categorically a failure, whatever the circumstances. I would like that to be represented somehow, and I, for one, would be willing to accept added complexity if it resulted in a better representation of what is, in my view, one of the defining aspects of the setting.

There is usually two factions:

- the "magical samurai" school who prefer an idealized and shiny Rokugan.

- the "grim and gritty" players who embrace the dirty side of the world.

I do dislike pointless grimdarkness, and I do like there being some hope of virtue prevailing, but I also recognise L5R's debt to samurai drama, which usually means tragedy, and I absolutely accept that unfair and unpleasant things can, do, and should, happen within the setting. But my point in raising and discussing the issue isn't that I want Rokugan to be a brighter and shinier place. My point is that Bushido is baked into the setting, and is one of the major things that differentiates L5R from other settings and systems. Whether you take a high road or a low road within the setting, Honour should be present, and I don't think the current system does justice to its importance or complexity.

Justice gets placed in Honesty for this one factor above others, in order for it to be Justice it must be righteous. Righteousness is based in truth, if it is not based in truth then it is false, and no longer Justice. That is my perspective on it anyways. I agree with you more, and more about tracking each virtue of bushido as this post progresses.

Your post reminded me of another interesting aspect of the tenets of Bushido, though: Gi is Justice as well as Honesty, and the two are inextricably linked in Leadership :

The majority of the tenets have relatively little to do with their actual names. Courage is about freedom (the freedom of action and freedom of life), Courtesy is about humility, Duty is about responsibility, Honesty is about righteousness, and Sincerity is about accountability.

Then, the tenets are not separate things, they are part of a bigger whole. As a samurai, you are not following tenets, you are following the Bushido - and that is all the tenets, all the time. You can't cherry-pick tenets and still follow the Bushido just as you can't drive a car while only having the chassis but no engine or wheels. You are either following all the tenets as one or you are not following the Bushido at all.

Also, in its core, Bushido emphases simplicity over complexity. It is rules-as-written, with a what-you-see-is-what-it-is approach and universal terms rather than specific ones. If you follow the Bushido then you must possess a great deal of common sense and mustn't overthink: things are what they are here, no need to see more than what is really there.

The main problem is that the conformist society of Rokugan pretty much "ate" the Bushido-as-it-should-be, and the "Bushido" the samurai follow in Rokugan has very little to do with how Akodo imagined it. And we all know what Akodo said about those who stray away from the path of Bushido... The core of the samurai drama in Rokugan is not about following Bushido, but following it wrongly that is equal to not following it at all.

And yet for all that, it can still contradict itself... and what's a good samurai to do then?

Then, the tenets are not separate things, they are part of a bigger whole. As a samurai, you are not following tenets, you are following the Bushido - and that is all the tenets, all the time. You can't cherry-pick tenets and still follow the Bushido just as you can't drive a car while only having the chassis but no engine or wheels. You are either following all the tenets as one or you are not following the Bushido at all.

With that, I agree. I have in the past used the metaphor of a jewel, with the tenets as facets of the stone- a gem with only one facet is no gemstone at all, and the best jewels of all are those in which each facet is flawless and even. This was the logic behind my measuring 'Honour' cumulatively on the basis of the lowest tenets, since any flaw weakens the whole. Every samurai with aspirations of honour should always seek to follow Bushido in its entirety, in every moment of their lives.

However, the simple fact remains that this just isn't always possible. There are always times when the tenets will come into conflict, and it is at those times when the honourable samurai must decide where their priorities lie, however much they might strive to follow Bushido as a whole. Even kanshi doesn't save you- while it is generally considered an honourable solution to honour-related dilemmas, you're still depriving your lord of a valuable samurai, and (depending on your familial situation) potentially cutting short your ancestral lineage, which is something that should never be done lightly.

In sum, I agree with your main point. But I don't agree that it's always possible to adhere perfectly to Bushido as a whole, or that all truly honourable people will always agree on the correct course of action.

The main problem is that the conformist society of Rokugan pretty much "ate" the Bushido-as-it-should-be, and the "Bushido" the samurai follow in Rokugan has very little to do with how Akodo imagined it. And we all know what Akodo said about those who stray away from the path of Bushido... The core of the samurai drama in Rokugan is not about following Bushido, but following it wrongly that is equal to not following it at all.

I see no justification for this view. It's certainly an interesting perspective - though one might think the Lion, at least, would have worked this out by now, since they can and do talk to people from the Dawn of the Empire, who might not have had a clearer perspective on what Bushido meant to Akodo-Kami - but I can't think of any basis for it, beyond your own interpretation of how things went down. Which isn't a put-down! On the contrary, as I said, it would be a fascinating concept to play with! I'm just not sure that anyone else is obliged to take it as canon truth.

And yet for all that, it can still contradict itself...

I don't think it can. At worst, it can pit you against society and its conventions or even tradition. A good samurai however does not bother with these things - Bushido is the only way, everything else is expendable.

And yet for all that, it can still contradict itself...

I don't think it can. At worst, it can pit you against society and its conventions or even tradition. A good samurai however does not bother with these things - Bushido is the only way, everything else is expendable.

As I said before, finding examples of where it contradicts itself takes no effort -- start with the one I posted.

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

This is the same as the peasant-killer-lord from earlier. A samurai who says "No" in this case does not violate Duty at all. In fact, she honors Duty by being true to her lord as she tells him that he is wrong and he should choose a different course of action (then immediately propose one). If the lord doesn't listen, then the problem runs deeper and the samurai must carefully consider what to do about her lord who have strayed away from the Bushido. Depending on the circumstances and the extent of he dishonorable action the lord wants to force on his retainer, this can end with the samurai abandoning her lord and seek out a new lord she can serve with honor or she can rise and save her lord from himself.

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

This is the same as the peasant-killer-lord from earlier. A samurai who says "No" in this case does not violate Duty at all. In fact, she honors Duty by being true to her lord as she tells him that he is wrong and he should choose a different course of action (then immediately propose one). If the lord doesn't listen, then the problem runs deeper and the samurai must carefully consider what to do about her lord who have strayed away from the Bushido. Depending on the circumstances and the extent of he dishonorable action the lord wants to force on his retainer, this can end with the samurai abandoning her lord and seek out a new lord she can serve with honor or she can rise and save her lord from himself.

What you are describing is not what is described in the L5R materials.

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

This is exactly why there's a "scale value" on the Honor. It's very hard to respect all the tenets all the time, otherwise, every samurai would have a "10" in their Honor box...

In that example, the Samurai would have to say that lying is wrong. However, if his Lord answers by telling that lying would prevent a war between him and someone else that would only result nothing good but the death of thousands of peasants, is it really dishonorable? I don't think so. Should the Lord gain or lose honor for this? Nope, he should stay the same. How about the samurai? It will probably depends on the lies and how he brings that lie. Best example I could bring of a lie that isn't entirely a lie is in Star Wars episode 4 when Obiwan tells to Luke how his father died which is clarified in the episode 6 how that "lie" is in fact a truth.

In my opinion, it would be dishonorable if the objectif of the request goes into any virtue of the Shurido. Now, the Lord would violate a virtue for a dark virtue, which isn't acceptable. But that's my opinion.

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

This is the same as the peasant-killer-lord from earlier. A samurai who says "No" in this case does not violate Duty at all. In fact, she honors Duty by being true to her lord as she tells him that he is wrong and he should choose a different course of action (then immediately propose one). If the lord doesn't listen, then the problem runs deeper and the samurai must carefully consider what to do about her lord who have strayed away from the Bushido. Depending on the circumstances and the extent of he dishonorable action the lord wants to force on his retainer, this can end with the samurai abandoning her lord and seek out a new lord she can serve with honor or she can rise and save her lord from himself.

What you are describing is not what is described in the L5R materials.

No, it isn't. Yet, it follows every tenet (as per the quotes in the 4th rulebook) word-by-word. As I said earlier, Bushido as presented is fairly detached from how it is supposedly written. Interestingly enough, the quotes are a 4th edition invention... things were much more clear-cut in the previous editions.

Otherwise, if you think about it, if every samurai in Rokugan would suddenly act like how I described, then we could most likely kiss samurai drama goodbye. And I don't think that any writer would like to do that.

In that example, the Samurai would have to say that lying is wrong. However, if his Lord answers by telling that lying would prevent a war between him and someone else that would only result nothing good but the death of thousands of peasants, is it really dishonorable?

Yes. There are no shades of grey, only right and wrong. There are no "but"-s when it comes to honor. The lord is wrong, and no excuse can make it up for him. He must find another way or change his order to "prevent the war" rather than "lie".

A samurai who is ordered by his lord to lie faces three choices -- violate Honesty, violate Duty, or commit kanshi .

This is the same as the peasant-killer-lord from earlier. A samurai who says "No" in this case does not violate Duty at all. In fact, she honors Duty by being true to her lord as she tells him that he is wrong and he should choose a different course of action (then immediately propose one). If the lord doesn't listen, then the problem runs deeper and the samurai must carefully consider what to do about her lord who have strayed away from the Bushido. Depending on the circumstances and the extent of he dishonorable action the lord wants to force on his retainer, this can end with the samurai abandoning her lord and seek out a new lord she can serve with honor or she can rise and save her lord from himself.

What you are describing is not what is described in the L5R materials.

I'll take a step sideways, and say that I agree that what AtoMaki describes is a valid option. I have myself played (honourable) characters who would have supported that standpoint, and I don't believe it inherently contradicts Bushido. Several quotes from Leadership could be cited in support of voicing dissent against dishonourable orders. I do not, however, believe that it is the only valid position for an honourable samurai to take, and I have also played characters who would never think of that kind of insubordination. If nothing else, samurai life is all about service to one's lord, and for a samurai to believe themselves entitled to correct their lord is incredibly presumptuous. Again, several quotes from Leadership could be cited in support of doing precisely what your lord asks, whatever it is. There is almost always at least some range of acceptable behaviour for honourable samurai; the breadth of that range depends on the circumstances.

Interesting though this argument is, though, I suspect it reflects deeply-held notions of what Bushido is and means, and is therefore not resolvable now (nor ever, unless and until FFG releases material that perfectly lays out what honourable conduct is, which would be of dubious benefit in my view). More importantly, it obscures the larger point, on which I'm fairly confident we all agree: that honour is deeply meaningful within the setting, and deserves proper representation. The fact that we can have this debate means that Honour is important; the fact that we are having it means that it's fundamentally contested.

In that example, the Samurai would have to say that lying is wrong. However, if his Lord answers by telling that lying would prevent a war between him and someone else that would only result nothing good but the death of thousands of peasants, is it really dishonorable?

Yes. There are no shades of grey, only right and wrong. There are no "but"-s when it comes to honor. The lord is wrong, and no excuse can make it up for him. He must find another way or change his order to "prevent the war" rather than "lie".

I would like you to explain me how comes there's no "shades of grey" since the system has a honor scale from 0 to 10? If there was no shades of grey, simply, right or wrong, there was only have a "Honorable/Dishonorable" check box. The system has greys in it because of that scales from 0 to 10, this is facts. Of course, someone with an honor rank of 10 would lose honors right away if he's doing something against any tenets, but as far as I know, there's not a lot of samurai with honor that high...

If nothing else, samurai life is all about service to one's lord, and for a samurai to believe themselves entitled to correct their lord is incredibly presumptuous. Again, several quotes from Leadership could be cited in support of doing precisely what your lord asks, whatever it is.

I can't find anything from Leadership that would support this. The only way I can imagine this to happen with a truly honorable samurai is if he specifically vowed to do anything his lord asks. However, in this case, the honor of said samurai is already questionable as his vow shows that he would be okay with dishonorable actions.

I would like you to explain me how comes there's no "shades of grey" since the system has a honor scale from 0 to 10? If there was no shades of grey, simply, right or wrong, there was only have a "Honorable/Dishonorable" check box. The system has greys in it because of that scales from 0 to 10, this is facts. Of course, someone with an honor rank of 10 would lose honors right away if he's doing something against any tenets, but as far as I know, there's not a lot of samurai with honor that high...

Strictly speaking, the implication here is that only samurai who have Honor 10.0 are actually honorable. Honor 10.0 is pretty much what Akodo imagined for the standard samurai. Samurai under the 10.0 mark are not necessary dishonorable, just... flawed. If fits the universe as most samurai are deeply flawed people who could never get past their shortcomings, and it makes for an easier roleplaying experience. Bushido is pretty much life on 'Dante Must Die' difficulty, so one shouldn't wonder that not everyone wants to play along.

If nothing else, samurai life is all about service to one's lord, and for a samurai to believe themselves entitled to correct their lord is incredibly presumptuous. Again, several quotes from Leadership could be cited in support of doing precisely what your lord asks, whatever it is.

I can't find anything from Leadership that would support this. The only way I can imagine this to happen with a truly honorable samurai is if he specifically vowed to do anything his lord asks. However, in this case, the honor of said samurai is already questionable as his vow shows that he would be okay with dishonorable actions.

Most obviously:

When you lead men, remember this lesson. Teach them what they must know. A student is blameless for his ignorance. He only does what the teacher tells him.

This clearly indicates that a leader is considered to be in a position equivalent to a sensei- ie, they know best, and the proper thing for a subordinate to do is to follow instructions without question.

Additionally:

A true samurai acts without claiming credit; he does not wish to appear superior to his lord.

Again, the notion of a samurai knowing better than their daimyo is deeply anathema- and that's written into Leadership , not a post-Akodo stultification of his ideas.

There are, of course, many, many, references to the importance of duty and service to one's lord. I would submit that the vast majority of samurai would interpret those references as meaning they should do what they are told, but I am willing to concede that correcting one's lord could be construed as a form of service in itself, if that act is considered permissible (which, again, I would consider debatable).

Strictly speaking, the implication here is that only samurai who have Honor 10.0 are actually honorable. Honor 10.0 is pretty much what Akodo imagined for the standard samurai. Samurai under the 10.0 mark are not necessary dishonorable, just... flawed. If fits the universe as most samurai are deeply flawed people who could never get past their shortcomings, and it makes for an easier roleplaying experience. Bushido is pretty much life on 'Dante Must Die' difficulty, so one shouldn't wonder that not everyone wants to play along.

Here, again, we disagree. Obviously Honour 10 is the ideal- and I even agree that anyone who doesn't quite reach that level could be considered 'flawed'. That doesn't mean, however, that they're not trying their absolute hardest and in good faith to be as honourable as possible at all times. It's just that it's practically impossible to avoid situations where you have no choice but to violate some tenet or another, even in a tiny way, and that means you'll pretty much never reach perfection. Yes, samurai are imperfect. No, that doesn't mean they're not honourable, or are somehow taking an easier road.

I have always seen this as one of the reasons why the Lion, especially the Matsu, like war so much (and why Leadership is insistent on the honourable quality of warfare)- in combat, it's very easy to be honourable. Fight fair, show respect to your enemy, and keep doing it until you are dead or nobody on the other side is fighting any more. If all a samurai ever had to do was fight, Bushido-related problems almost disappear (though not entirely- see, again, Akodo Hari's example). In the wider world, life is not that simple, and neither is Bushido.

When you lead men, remember this lesson. Teach them what they must know. A student is blameless for his ignorance. He only does what the teacher tells him.

This clearly indicates that a leader is considered to be in a position equivalent to a sensei- ie, they know best, and the proper thing for a subordinate to do is to follow instructions without question.

Uhm... no? It is just the usual "if you hide important details from your men, then don't be surprised that they start acting stupidly" thing. Proper exchange of information is pretty darn important, after all. If your troops fail because you didn't instruct them properly, then the blame is all yours to take.

A true samurai acts without claiming credit; he does not wish to appear superior to his lord.

Again, the notion of a samurai knowing better than their daimyo is deeply anathema- and that's written into Leadership , not a post-Akodo stultification of his ideas.

Obviously, you are not supposed to smear your lord's mistakes all over his face or tell everyone that he is in the wrong. That would be quite stupid. A samurai can be better than his lord, he just shouldn't make a big deal out of it.

That doesn't mean, however, that they're not trying their absolute hardest and in good faith to be as honourable as possible at all times.

In Bushido, there is no middle way. Trying is appreciable, but it makes no difference.

It's just that it's practically impossible to avoid situations where you have no choice but to violate some tenet or another

No, it is impossible to avoid situations where you have no choice but to violate a social convention, custom or tradition. Like this whole "muh perceptions" thing that is going on or the obsession with civility and etiquette.

Yes, samurai are imperfect. No, that doesn't mean they're not honourable, or are somehow taking an easier road.

Not as much as taking an easier road but more like manipulating the standards for the sake of convenience.

Isn't samurai drama practically built on the character's conflicting obligations and conflicting moral tenets?

Isn't samurai drama practically built on the character's conflicting obligations and conflicting moral tenets?

It is. That's why non-conflicting moral tenets that straighten conflicting obligations are a big no-no for the setting. Imagine a Rokugan where the vast majority of the samurai have Honor 10.0 (or higher) - there would be no conflict, no drama, no nothing, only samurai who do the objectively right thing all the time. This would be noblebright turned up to nine-thousand, a world where not even the 'good guys' but the best guys rule and do best guys stuff all the time. And while it is slightly more interesting than it sounds (the homebrew alternate-Rokugan of my gaming club has a lot of this stuff - that's why I'm so smart here ), I don't think that the official Rokugan wants to be anything like this.

Isn't samurai drama practically built on the character's conflicting obligations and conflicting moral tenets?

It is. That's why non-conflicting moral tenets that straighten conflicting obligations are a big no-no for the setting. Imagine a Rokugan where the vast majority of the samurai have Honor 10.0 (or higher) - there would be no conflict, no drama, no nothing, only samurai who do the objectively right thing all the time. This would be noblebright turned up to nine-thousand, a world where not even the 'good guys' but the best guys rule and do best guys stuff all the time. And while it is slightly more interesting than it sounds (the homebrew alternate-Rokugan of my gaming club has a lot of this stuff - that's why I'm so smart here ), I don't think that the official Rokugan wants to be anything like this.

OK... so how does your stated position ( which I'm reading as "Bushido never conflicts with itself" ) mesh with that?

Isn't samurai drama practically built on the character's conflicting obligations and conflicting moral tenets?

It is. That's why non-conflicting moral tenets that straighten conflicting obligations are a big no-no for the setting. Imagine a Rokugan where the vast majority of the samurai have Honor 10.0 (or higher) - there would be no conflict, no drama, no nothing, only samurai who do the objectively right thing all the time. This would be noblebright turned up to nine-thousand, a world where not even the 'good guys' but the best guys rule and do best guys stuff all the time. And while it is slightly more interesting than it sounds (the homebrew alternate-Rokugan of my gaming club has a lot of this stuff - that's why I'm so smart here ), I don't think that the official Rokugan wants to be anything like this.

OK... so how does your stated position ( which I'm reading as "Bushido never conflicts with itself" ) mesh with that?

It is the non-conflicting moral tenet in the equitation.

Through all these posts it seems as if Automaki is looking at the essence of bushido, rather than the letter. The letter, or written code will be filtered by each reader, and possibly interpretted in various manner. Thus creating conflicts. The essence of bushido could not do this, or else it would fall, and overtime cease to exist.

Through all these posts it seems as if Automaki is looking at the essence of bushido, rather than the letter. The letter, or written code will be filtered by each reader, and possibly interpretted in various manner. Thus creating conflicts. The essence of bushido could not do this, or else it would fall, and overtime cease to exist.

In my opinion, letter and essence are the same thing in this case. Yes, it can be misread, but that's the fault of the reader and not the Bushido.

Through all these posts it seems as if Automaki is looking at the essence of bushido, rather than the letter. The letter, or written code will be filtered by each reader, and possibly interpretted in various manner. Thus creating conflicts. The essence of bushido could not do this, or else it would fall, and overtime cease to exist.

In my opinion, letter and essence are the same thing in this case. Yes, it can be misread, but that's the fault of the reader and not the Bushido.

The letter is never the essence. Nothing is very that simple, nothing is ever that black-and-white.

Through all these posts it seems as if Automaki is looking at the essence of bushido, rather than the letter. The letter, or written code will be filtered by each reader, and possibly interpretted in various manner. Thus creating conflicts. The essence of bushido could not do this, or else it would fall, and overtime cease to exist.

In my opinion, letter and essence are the same thing in this case. Yes, it can be misread, but that's the fault of the reader and not the Bushido.

The letter is never the essence. Nothing is very that simple, nothing is ever that black-and-white.

The Bushido kinda is. I mean, you can put more thought into it, but then you are doing it wrong.