My main point was that people were less worried about using cards to duel with if it didn't mean that the card was gone for the game.

My main point was that people were less worried about using cards to duel with if it didn't mean that the card was gone for the game.

That is arguable.

Very few L5R games went to FATE deck draw out and an objective analysis would show that any card discarded in a duel might have well been on the bottom of the deck unless you managed to draw through your whole deck.

The problem was more a "my deck can not win a duel and does not get any advantage from dueling so I will dislike being forced to duel and will give up without doing anything when challenged" mentality.

My main point was that people were less worried about using cards to duel with if it didn't mean that the card was gone for the game.

That is arguable.

Very few L5R games went to FATE deck draw out and an objective analysis would show that any card discarded in a duel might have well been on the bottom of the deck unless you managed to draw through your whole deck.

The problem was more a "my deck can not win a duel and does not get any advantage from dueling so I will dislike being forced to duel and will give up without doing anything when challenged" mentality.

yeah, my perception of dueling is that it went roughly like so:

1: duels are unrefusable and open or battle. generally awesome, and unless you are a duelist you can't win. they are reviled if you aren't a dueling deck.

2: change how "double chi" works. then change how you can refuse.

3: focus effects are still super annoying thanks to the few unrefusable duels left.

4: because duels are still annoying if you aren't specced to them, people either blanket strike or blanket refuse and take the cost. this is viewed as not good.

4: duels become generic battle actions that key off a thematic keyword and require a lot of deck construction, and now the dueling deck loses a kind of embarrassing percentage of the time due to dumb luck.

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

Thrust and Parry!!!!

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

personally, i think the solution is to remove things that make it easier to duel, but let dueling be just a little brutal for those clans that are good at it. cav sucks to face. ditto naval. unicorn and mantis just get them. should be the same for dueling. it should just be lame when you get dueled, but it shouldn't be something you can spec for to the point that its an NPE. i think the biggest problem dueling had was it was across the line good, then they overcompensated and neutered it into oblivion.

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

personally, i think the solution is to remove things that make it easier to duel, but let dueling be just a little brutal for those clans that are good at it. cav sucks to face. ditto naval. unicorn and mantis just get them. should be the same for dueling. it should just be lame when you get dueled, but it shouldn't be something you can spec for to the point that its an NPE. i think the biggest problem dueling had was it was across the line good, then they overcompensated and neutered it into oblivion.

Speaking of which, that Naval thing always bothered me a bit with Mantis. I tended to play Tsuruchi, and many of them did not get Naval , despite the card art actually showing them on board a ship or wading in surf or whatever .

(Tsuruchi Kinuyo and Tsuruchi Hikari come to mind.)

But then you have people like Tsuruchi Kaitaru and Tsuruchi Taito (both versions), who actually get Naval despite not having water anywhere in sight!

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

personally, i think the solution is to remove things that make it easier to duel, but let dueling be just a little brutal for those clans that are good at it. cav sucks to face. ditto naval. unicorn and mantis just get them. should be the same for dueling. it should just be lame when you get dueled, but it shouldn't be something you can spec for to the point that its an NPE. i think the biggest problem dueling had was it was across the line good, then they overcompensated and neutered it into oblivion.

Speaking of which, that Naval thing always bothered me a bit with Mantis. I tended to play Tsuruchi, and many of them did not get Naval , despite the card art actually showing them on board a ship or wading in surf or whatever .

(Tsuruchi Kinuyo and Tsuruchi Hikari come to mind.)

But then you have people like Tsuruchi Kaitaru and Tsuruchi Taito (both versions), who actually get Naval despite not having water anywhere in sight!

Dude... That's just the tip of the iceberg of things not making sense. I understand that you are mantis player, but there's a whole mess of things out there besides that.

Like Shadowlands characters not losing you honor when coming in to play.

Oni in duels... Seriously, can you even imagine that in your head?? haha

But yeah... Not all mantis peeps having naval is kind of easy to grasp when there are a whole ton of things that are actually weird.

My main point was that people were less worried about using cards to duel with if it didn't mean that the card was gone for the game.

That is arguable.

Very few L5R games went to FATE deck draw out and an objective analysis would show that any card discarded in a duel might have well been on the bottom of the deck unless you managed to draw through your whole deck.

Extend Discipline mechanic that could allow to utilize discarded (focused) cards and NOT printing cards like VTD that made this mechanic completely useless in CCG. Also low FV for Discipline cards aka you play duels so never will use them and i won't refuse your challenge, lose duel, but focus like hell to make my discard full of them to create serious card advantage.

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

personally, i think the solution is to remove things that make it easier to duel, but let dueling be just a little brutal for those clans that are good at it. cav sucks to face. ditto naval. unicorn and mantis just get them. should be the same for dueling. it should just be lame when you get dueled, but it shouldn't be something you can spec for to the point that its an NPE. i think the biggest problem dueling had was it was across the line good, then they overcompensated and neutered it into oblivion.

Speaking of which, that Naval thing always bothered me a bit with Mantis. I tended to play Tsuruchi, and many of them did not get Naval , despite the card art actually showing them on board a ship or wading in surf or whatever .

(Tsuruchi Kinuyo and Tsuruchi Hikari come to mind.)

But then you have people like Tsuruchi Kaitaru and Tsuruchi Taito (both versions), who actually get Naval despite not having water anywhere in sight!

Dude... That's just the tip of the iceberg of things not making sense. I understand that you are mantis player, but there's a whole mess of things out there besides that.

Like Shadowlands characters not losing you honor when coming in to play.

Oni in duels... Seriously, can you even imagine that in your head?? haha

But yeah... Not all mantis peeps having naval is kind of easy to grasp when there are a whole ton of things that are actually weird.

the shadowlands honor thing drove me nuts in spider. it was frustrating that spider clan was punished for playing its own personalities, often to the point of suicide if your opponent was playing dishonor. i get that there was a storyline notion that spider couldn't just have tainted folk everywhere anymore, but from a mechanical standpoint it was a garbage decision.

I like kempys idea as it creates interesting choices.

Also, just to mention, I ****ing hated Vtd. Not even Recruitment Officer was that auto include. I guess A Game of Dice was, but that atleast that dug to other cards and was unique, rather than the bs vtd was.

Seven clans on a wheel like the 40k LCG so there will be combining of factions within limits. Sensei could be revamped to facilitate this. Unaligned will suck up Mantis, Naga, Shadowlands, etc. The first deluxe expansion will be Shadowlands Horde and will shape them as a stand alone like the Tyranids (outside the combo wheel). That is my prediction and for now I am sticking with it.

How would it have changed dueling if there were a slight random element? Something like, "After a strike has been declared, both players discard the top card of their Fate deck and add its focus value (but no other focus effects) to their total"?

I don't really think there was a problem with the "each player can Focus up to X times alternating between players, add duel stat and compare totals" mechanics of dueling. The NPE problem developed due to the common deck design mentally of "use the best cards you can use and do not care about FVs or Focus Effects when the best cards have low FVs" that most clans and themes had.

I'd think making Focusing a more predominant element of the game would actually have been better for L5R. For example, the Tactical action should of been Focusing a card (from hand or top of deck) to get a Force bonus and Melee/Ranged/Fear effects could be native boosted by Focusing. Also any time a card was Focused should have triggered Focus Effects.

Extend Discipline mechanic that could allow to utilize discarded (focused) cards and NOT printing cards like VTD that made this mechanic completely useless in CCG. Also low FV for Discipline cards aka you play duels so never will use them and i won't refuse your challenge, lose duel, but focus like hell to make my discard full of them to create serious card advantage.

Discipline and other play from the discard effects were good mechanics for getting people to Focus even if they didn't expect to win. Heck during Emperor pretty much even Dragon Kensei deck I ran up against loved to Focus as it let them get weapons in the discard which they could play.

VtD was mostly Meta that went overboard. The Focus effect should only have removed one card and the Battle/Open action did far to much for no loss of tempo.

To the original topic, here is what I would like to see. When possible I will use standard FFG terminology (Character, Location, Event, etc),

Card Pool: 220 Cards (Using AGoT 2nd ed as an example)

Each Faction (The 9 Great Clans, with Naga possibly replacing Mantis much to my chagrin) receives 20 Cards:

Characters: 12, These will be further Subdivided into Unique and Non Unique at 5 and 7 respectively.

Locations: 2

Events: 3

Attachments: 2

Plot/Objective: 0, Faction specific plots/objectives will see printing in future supplements

Sensei/Stronghold: 1

Neutral Cards: 40

Characters: 6

Locations: 5, These will mainly be generic economy building, and resource management

Events: 5

Attachments: 3

Plot/Objectives: 15

Sensei/Stronghold: 1, Multi-Faction Alliance type card

Rings: 5

The Core Set will contain 1 Copy of each Faction Card and Neutral Event, Attachment, Plot/Objective, and Ring and 2 Copies of Each Neutral Character, Sensei/Stronghold, and Location.

The Meaning of Card Types

Characters: These will be the personalities from the old game, as well as the armies of each Clan. They will be intended form the largest portion of a player's deck.

Locations: These will be the holdings from the old game. Mostly these will handle resources (gold/koku, card draw, straightening Characters, etc) but will occasionally have powerful actions on them.

Events: These will be the strategies of the old game, and it is my hope that FFG keeps the old name. I am hoping that unlike some of FFG's more recent games we will see a larger portion of the card base being made up of these cards, and that they are generally free to play. I feel this makes for a more surprising and dynamic game.

Attachments: These will be the gear and quirks of your characters. These will likely all have Traits that further subdivide them. At a minimum we will see Condition, Spell, and Weapon. Spells will only be able to attach/equip to a Shugenja Character.

Plot/Objectives: These will be roughly equivalent to the events of the old game, though this is only a rough equivalency. These cards will create a list of the short term goals a player can achieve to receive victory points for politics, and can be taken to mark the victory points a player can achieve militarily. Achieved Plot/Objectives enter play and give their player some benefit, either enhance resources or an ability. Once either defeated (military) or achieved (politics) they add add a victory token to the successful player's victory pile. These cards are kept face up in one of four provinces. Provinces refill after their Plot/Objective is resolved/defeated.

Sensei/Stronghold: These cards are the Warlord/Identity/Faction Card of the game. They will give players a basic ability, and if they represent a sensei or clan leader may or may not be treated in a manner similar to a character.

Rings: These cards represent the different facets of enlightenment, and are resolved like Plot/Objective. However, after they are resolved they enter play, add one victory token to a players victory pile, and give a player either an action or some other special capability. Unlike Plot/Objective cards, they resolve from the players hand, rather than a province. A player may not have more than 1 copy of a single ring by title in their deck.

Deck Building Rules:

-Players will have 2 decks. One Fate Deck for their objectives, and one Dynasty Deck for their Characters, Attachments, Locations, Rings, and Events.

-The Fate deck must be exactly 10 cards, no more, no less.

-The Dynasty Deck must include at least 60 cards.

-A players Sensei/Stronghold begins the game in play.

-Players may not have more than a certain number, probably 2, of any single Plot/Objective card by title in their Fate Deck.

-Players may not include more than 3 of any non-Ring Card by title in their Dynasty Deck. Rings are limited to 1 card by title.

Just to mention, I do really hope that ffg uses the rings as cards in play. I am very hopeful they will but you never know.

I want them to because I intend on using my old full bleed promo rings in casual play. It's going to look sick

....with Naga possibly replacing Mantis much to my chagrin

I've been thinking about this problem lately too.

I think a strong in-game (story-line wise) argument can be made about about merging the Naga and the Mantis. Each family has key traits that correspond with the Naga.

Each Faction (The 9 Great Clans, with Naga possibly replacing Mantis much to my chagrin) receives X Cards:

Attachments: 2

Neutral Cards: 40

Attachments: 3

Attachments: These will be the gear and quirks of your characters. These will likely all have Traits that further subdivide them. At a minimum we will see Condition, Spell, and Weapon. Spells will only be able to attach/equip to a Shugenja Character.

If there are going to be only 5 different attachments that one Faction can put in their deck, wouldn't it be a good Idea to not to include Spells in the base set? (Except for the Unique Black Scroll the Phoenix get. Hi Gunichi. )

Would you support Shugenja being printed with spell-like abilities on the Character? For example, Kitsune Nakumi summoning a Fox companion or Isawa Koiso casting a Fireball of Pacifism . You could even include scroll tokens to represent how many times per game the spell/ability could be used.

This is just a guess based on what was printed for AGoT 2nd. I would expect any spells to be primarily focused on the Phoenix with maybe the Dragon, Mantis and Unicorn getting one as well. I am really hoping for no Black Scrolls in the Core. Those would be best handled as part of a Pack Cycle, or maybe even a Deluxe expansion.

Spell-like abilities is a term that makes no sense in a card game, and smacks of 3.5 d20.

As an expansion of my above post about the cardpool, here is what I expect, or at least am hoping for, mechanically for the game.

Turn Structure

Turns will be divided into at least 4 Phases: Draw, Marshal/Deploy, Combat, Dominance/Taxation. The game will be composed of turns in which players take alternating actions, or pass being active off from one to another.

Draw: This is the beginning of the turn. Effects that last until the beginning of a turn will end here. Some form of competitive Initiative will resolve, and then players will each draw cards, either up to a Reserve Value (As in Star Wars) or a fixed amount (as in Game of Thrones). There will likely be an action window after Initiative, and before drawing Cards. Drawing cards will end the phase.

Marshal/Deploy: This is the action phase form the old game, though it will also be the Dynasty phase. Players will recruit Characters, equip them with Attachments, and purchase Locations from their hand. I am hoping for resource generating cards to generate a pool of gold tokens (Koku) that will remain in place between phases, and that doing so will be phase restricted to this phase.

Combat: This will be the Battle Phase of the old game. Players will attack the Plot/Objectives in each others' Provinces. I am actually hoping that combat will be more of a player action, although a complicated one, than a phase in its own right.

Dominance/Taxation: This is the end phase from the old game. Players will resolve their Plot/Objectives, and return any unspent koku to the Imperial Treasury as taxes.

Wining the Game

Players will each be attempting to accumulate a certain number of Victory Points. These will likely have a more flavorful name. I think this number will be at least 5, but probably not higher than 10. This will depend on if certain powerful Plot/Objectives are worth more VP's, or if all Plot/Objectives are equal in value. If the goal is higher, as in Game of Thrones, then I expect we will see a mechanic similar to Renown, with certain powerful characters able to accumulate VP's as well.

I find it unlikely that anything beyond this bare bones take on the game will be anything other than hopeful imaginings. That said here are some of mine.

-The Imperial Favor will still be around. It will offer players a small number (1 or 2) of powerful abilities, but probably not card draw.

-If the Favor does not grant a player abilities, then it will determine who goes first. If this is the case I would not be surprised to see a Plot/Objective that requires you to give it to your opponent to achieve it.

-Character death will be similar to Game of Thrones, with dead Characters entering a dead pile separate from the discard pile.

-Dueling will be back, and hopefully will only be to the death.

-Focus Values will not make a return. I am unsure about how this will affect dueling, but I never liked them.

-Bowing (rotating 90 degrees clockwise) will mark card use, and bowed cards will be unable to use their actions. I am really hoping that this will not be marked with tokens.

-Dishonorable will be around as a Character status. This could be used to help resolve Plot/Objectives.

I kinda wish if they keep the Rings as actual cards, that they aren't cards that start the game in your deck. The biggest problem with designing Enlightenment as a deck, was that, for the majority of its existence, the only way it functioned as a competitive deck was as a pure combo deck, something the playerbase repeatedly showed distaste for. This is in large part due to the amount of draw/deck-search required to find specific rings and marry them with 4-5 cards that enable them to enter play, without going over hand-size limits and being forced to discard either pieces needed to play your current ring, pieces needed to play a future ring, or draw/search needed to find and/or set-up for the next ring.

If you just have the Rings start the game set aside and "claim" them as you meet their requirements, the level of card-draw/deck-search required to make the deck even function is seriously reduced, and the hand-size limitations become considerably less taxing. It would also allow non-Enlightenment decks to decide if they want to pursue any particular ring's "trick" to complete it, without such a pursuit being useless when they don't draw the particular ring.

This would allow enlightenment to settle into a "mid-range" strategy slot like "Switch" generally did, instead of the "BALLS TO THE WALL COMBO ERRYDAY" position it occupied that the playerbase seemed to loathe if it was anywhere near efficacy. It did manage to fill this slot a few times in life during the years where various holdings (including an always-available Legacy holding) enabled easy access to specific ring-fetch. Lessons of Earth Enlightenment played very similar to a defensive honor-runner deck, slowly grinding out one ring a turn while putting up big walls during this time. Monk Military Enlightenment also popped up for a while when they made 3 of the rings have battle-centric resolution requirements; it was a weaker military deck, but threatened to Enlighten in order to force awkward engagements or provide inevitability in the case of board stalls.

Aside: I personally love Combo decks and enjoyed the quirkiness of the victory condition. However, I recognize that it was basically never well received when it was competitive as a full Combo Deck, and wasting significant design space on an entire cross-clan theme and core victory condition that is *intentionally* noncompetitive is just as bad as making a competitive deck you know your playerbase is averse to, especially with the reduced card-output of an LCG. It's just a waste of limited card-slots.

[...]

If you just have the Rings start the game set aside and "claim" them as you meet their requirements, the level of card-draw/deck-search required to make the deck even function is seriously reduced, and the hand-size limitations become considerably less taxing. It would also allow non-Enlightenment decks to decide if they want to pursue any particular ring's "trick" to complete it, without such a pursuit being useless when they don't draw the particular ring.

[...]

I think this would be really awesome. It would look like a real victory condition and not a combo you have, like you said, to dig out of your deck.

I know enlightenment victory was supposed to be a hard-fought victory more than military or honor, but you always had to devote at least a third of your deck to card-draw and deck manipulation to ensure you could get the good ring and/or combo pieces at the same time. It became "easier" with a ring-fetching Sensei, but I think Chuckle's idea here is really the way to go.

Well, that is, if the rules of the LCG look like the CCG's.

As an expansion of my above post about the cardpool, here is what I expect, or at least am hoping for, mechanically for the game.

Turn Structure [...]

I don't know people really want to play rebranded AGoT. For me it might be total disaster.

As an expansion of my above post about the cardpool, here is what I expect, or at least am hoping for, mechanically for the game.

Turn Structure [...]

I don't know people really want to play rebranded AGoT. For me it might be total disaster.

This is just a projection based on looking at how FFG's card games are organized on a turn by turn basis. Though most games follow a similar structure. First the turn has some sort of set up or reset, then players buy stuff, then they attack eachother, then (maybe) they buy more stuff, and finally things are wrapped up. TL:DR-ing it to rebranded AGoT ignores this.

I am curious, what, in particular, makes you see this projection as a rebranding?

This is just a projection based on looking at how FFG's card games are organized on a turn by turn basis. Though most games follow a similar structure. First the turn has some sort of set up or reset, then players buy stuff, then they attack eachother, then (maybe) they buy more stuff, and finally things are wrapped up. TL:DR-ing it to rebranded AGoT ignores this.

I am curious, what, in particular, makes you see this projection as a rebranding?

I thought the same thing, so I hope you don't mind if I try to explain why. I like the ideas you're putting out - they're detailed and thought through, but you did ask, so...

The first thing that stands out as a Thrones reskin is the naming of the phases, especially Dominance. While Taxation (arguably) has a role in L5R, there's never been a Dominance or equivalent mechanic, and adding it in does look like a Thrones import. Next, there's the bit about attacking the plot/objectives rather than the provinces. You might have more of an idea what you meant, but again, bringing in plots/objectives sounds a lot like a Thrones mechanic, much more so than L5R.

Don't get me wrong, I like AGOT, and have been playing it while L5R is down. I've also tried a few of FFGs other card games, and have high hopes for L5R. Their games are admirably different, and much as I like the GoT mechanics, I don't expect them to import them wholesale into L5R (though I do expect heavy use of tokens That said, I thought the layout you did of card types for a base set was quite good. The 10-card plot deck, again, sounds a bit GoT-ish, but that doesn't make it wrong or bad. It's certainly possible.

I did ask, ad take no offense at reasoned response. Civil discussion is the best source of clarified ideas after all.

The naming, as I observed in my first post, is just to stick with FFG style naming conventions, this thinking extended into deck construction. Both Star Wars and AGoT have a small secondary deck. In Star Wars this deck is called the Objective Deck, and contains 10 cards. When players attack each other these are the cards that are actually being attacked. Players do not lose Objective slots when their Objectives are defeated, only the objective in question. Similarly in WH40k: Conquest, when a player takes control of a planet the place that planet holds is not destroyed, it is refilled as all the other planets move up to fill the vacancies.

I believe it is safe to assume that people here are familiar with AGoT's plot deck. Attacks in that game, though, are challenges against opposing player though, as there are no cards in a position that could be attacked. Cards and game tokens are affected by the results of these challenges, but only the players get attacked

I have also been trying to figure out how a more Netrunner corp style, or possibly a WH40k: Conquest planet style of province might work. These, however, would be a serious departure from classic L5R's feel. Because of that I have doubts about their likelihood.

I recognize that L5R has not classically had a Dominance or Taxation type mechanic, but each of these are more generally wrap up mechanics and features, along with Initiative, that I would consider to be core to the FFG style of card game. Additionally I needed a phase to resolve the proposed Plot/Objective cards. Other than Rings, since those enter play when triggered as stated in their description. That necessity, however, is predicated on the idea that Plot/Objectives cannot resolve in the Marshall/Deploy or Combat Phases.

The two of my ideas that seemed the most like AGoT clones to me were Initiative, a staple across FFG's simultaneous turn games, and when I proposed that the number of Victory Points needed might cross into double digits. The second was mainly because of the necessity of a Renown style mechanic in that instance.

I am really hoping for no Black Scrolls in the Core.

That was a joke aimed the Phoenix. Apparently, my aim needs work.

Spell-like abilities is a term that makes no sense in a card game, and smacks of 3.5 d20.

That doesn't answer the question.

.

.

.

.

And it makes perfect sense from a narrative/flavor standpoint.