It is more like the players will do Assessment in the first and/or the second round to seize up their opponents (knowing the enemy's Weapon Skill and Insight Rank is a good thing) from behind Defense or Full Defense. When the fight actually erupts, players usually do Assessment to learn Armor TN and Wounds so that they attack the opponents they can hit and they don't waste their attacks on dying enemies. It is like an "information is power" and "knowing is half the battle" kind of deal, and it will sure introduce small breaks in the fight when everyone is busy assessing the other (especially when changing opponents and you have to do the assessing all over again).

On the other hand, a Focus action is like a compact Center Stance, but without its drawbacks. It is, like, why wouldn't you use it? Get that Focus rolling and wreck somebody's day with Feint. Negate Defense/Full Defense Stances. Get through Wound TN penalties. But yeah, just like with Center Stance, it is going to break the action only to push it into overdrive next (this can get a little rocket arena-y btw).

It sounds like the actual problem is which stances you can perform the action in rather than a problem of the actions themselves. Its very similar to the problem of Shugenja casting spells in Defense stance because their is no reason not to and they are not penalized for doing so. I suspect most of your problems would be fixed by limiting the actions to being only performed while in Center stance.

Also L5R is a very Rocket Taggy game already. A single normal attack has a good chance of taking out characters. Feint is also a very poorly designed maneuver granting far greater benefits for 2 Raises than anything else. Complaining about things while the actual flaws are with existing mechanics isn't really giving them a fair shake.

I suspect most of your problems would be fixed by limiting the actions to being only performed while in Center stance.

That would just draw out the time spent passively to a whole round from a single action. Tho it would make Center Stance more useful and less suck-y.

Also L5R is a very Rocket Taggy game already. A single normal attack has a good chance of taking out characters.

With a Focus Action in the game, a normal attack has an almost fool-proof chance of taking out characters. Things were so bad we had to introduce "puffer wounds" and make "real wounds" a whole different attribute altogether.

Given that L5R is based off of Chambara style movies and lore in that a single strike could take someone out...this is not out of line

Yeah, but what's good for a movie isn't good for games that include incredibly swingy random mechanic of exploding dice rolls. Which is why I took away exploding dice on damage from enemies and replaced it with flat modifiers (so an opponent might do 8k3+7 dmg, but without ability to explode, capping their damage at 10-37). We also narrate anything above Injured as just weakened concentration, leaving actual "being hit" to Injured and more.

Puffer Wounds are super cool concept!

Expanding some more on "single strike taking out people in movies" - consider that while some of attacks that don't hit characters in other media are "missed" in RPG mechanics sense, some of them do indeed hit and are soaked up by HP. "Confirming the attack roll = literally hitting and shedding blood" is one of things that IMHO really made things hard for RPGs for years.

I don't like damage-as-"miss" mechanics, as in D20 and others. To me, such mechanics misinform narrative: "He hit! Except not really." I think HP/wounds/whatever should represent getting HURT. Which is why I like the L5R wounds system. If the game is too lethal, maybe adjust damage. But IMO it's fine

Though I do like systems that differentiate damage severity, like Stun and Killing damage from Wild Talents. I'd love to see something like that in L5R--it could speed up combat while reducing actual chance of death, if players are worried about that.

I don't like damage-as-"miss" mechanics, as in D20 and others. To me, such mechanics misinform narrative: "He hit! Except not really." I think HP/wounds/whatever should represent getting HURT. Which is why I like the L5R wounds system. If the game is too lethal, maybe adjust damage. But IMO it's fine

Actually, there's a sidebar in the corebook to reduce the lethality of L5R, it's to change the Earth x 2 rule to Earth x (3, 4 or 5). But, I do agree that the "damage-as-miss" mechanics feels out of place for me... I do like RPG where damage actually means something and I do hate "Itchy and Scratchy fights" in RPG, that's basically why I stopped playing some RPGs for that. It felt boring and unrewarding, compared to when I was getting out of some fight with no death but everyone at or below Injured. It felt rewarding.

How lethal are the current FFG rpgs?

How lethal are the current FFG rpgs?

Since all they technically have are the Warhammer RPGs (which are leaving soon) and the Star Wars RPGs, it's pretty easy to run down...

The Warhammer RPGs feature moderately tough PCs. Toughness, Armor, a wide variety of fighting-style Talents, and Fate Points all combine to keep PCs alive. Against them are the ludicrously overpowered weapons, Chaos powers, spells, and other ways of killing lots of people very quickly. It ends up being a semi-grindy setting (much like the tabletop that inspired it, which was probably the point of the combat system) in which PCs are more likely to just get gruesomely injured rather than disintegrated outright. Madness and corruption are far more likely outcomes in a long-term campaign. Still, it's 40K, so if you go looking for foes capable of one-shotting your party, you have an endless variety to choose from.

The Star Wars RPGs are more concerned about cinematic style fighting. Player narrative control, last-ditch efforts, helping each other, and injuries that impair you but still give you a chance to do the cool stuff you need to carry the day are far more the likely outcome of battles than death. That being said, players who fight stupid (not finding cover in an exchange of blaster fire, say), take on odds beyond their capabilities, and otherwise push their luck can find themselves ground into a fine paste without too much difficulty...but the game really does require some effort on the GMs side to accidentally kill a PC.

EDIT: I wandered through their "other games" section, and it appears that FFG is still producing other RPGs: Anima, Fireborn, the End of the World, and even Midnight is still in print. I know next to nothing about Anima and Fireborn; The End of the World is a "real-life" simulation-style RPG in which you're supposed to play yourself in various classic horror scenarios, and as such combat tends to be deadly; and Midnight is 3.x style D&D, in which combat is D&D.

Sounds reasonable to make it harder to kill a PC. You could even keep the 'raise' mechanic idea from 4E but adjust it so a player puts himself at more risk in an attempt for a better reward and less on just raising a difficulty score..

It will be interesting to see if FFG does an RPG set in Rokugan; just because one existed before doesn't mean that's what they'll do now that they own the IP. They are losing all the Warhammer goodness, which means they have room for more in-house RPG work, but they also might be interested in promoting their home world Terrinoth (the Rune-whatever world) into some sort of RPG line to help cross-promotion.

If they do go on with an L5R RPG, next we have to see if they'll stay with roll'n'keep. They bought that rules system along with the Rokugan IP, so they're quite free and clear to use it, and it is the mechanics the game has been using. Having met the guys in their RPG department, though, and listening to lots of their interviews over the years, roll'n'keep is not their style of mechanics that they enjoy; unsurprisingly, they enjoy the more narrative-based in-house FFG home system (developed for Warhammer Fantasy Third Edition, and now selling like hotcakes in their Star Wars lines). It's no big surprise that designers will produce the game featuring the mechanics they prefer; that's what RPGs have been doing since Chainmail back in the 1970s. And of course, they might just come up with something entirely new, but given the probable team members involved in this, I'd expect emphasis towards narrative and shared plot control in whatever new system they dream up.

So maybe they'll change the mechanics, maybe they won't. Not up to us. If they stay with roll'n'keep, I'd expect to see Raises and other forms of narrative player control expanded and codified greatly, as the FFG bunch are big into cooperative storytelling around the table. If they change to their house system, then Raises will probably be shuffled over to the design area where Advantages and Threat are now in Star Wars. The one thing I'm pretty certain on is if they stay with roll'n'keep, it will not be to keep any old fan base, because the old fan base was insufficiently large enough to sustain an RPG line to begin with (otherwise, the IP wouldn't have been sold). Warhammer Fantasy 3.0 showed they were more than willing to ditch an entire system and make a new one if they felt the new system worked better for what they wanted, and then let the new system earn its own fans, rather than continue with a rules set they didn't like.

So, unsurprisingly, what mechanics they'll choose will depend on the ones they liked. In any case, it's all academic as no RPG has been announced. I think it's quite probable, but we'll have to see.

The one thing I'm pretty certain on is if they stay with roll'n'keep, it will not be to keep any old fan base, because the old fan base was insufficiently large enough to sustain an RPG line to begin with (otherwise, the IP wouldn't have been sold).

One thing for sure, is they need to look back at the D20 attempt, which totally failed. This attempt was to reach more people but it was only seen as another supplement like the other.

However, as for the player base, I will not deny it was low, but I don't feel like AEG did a great job at promoting the RPG. I followed the RPG for more than 10 years now and I always feel like their marketting was: "Hey look at L5R CCG! Oh and... by the way, there's also an RPG, over here! " (And yes, I did changed the font size on purpose). I will also admit that the L5R communauty where I live is very low, mainly because there's no marketting done about it here. When I asked about the Ivory Edition a few week after it release, I was told: "Sorry, the CCG is dead." So, there was a huge problem with the promotion at first, at least, where I live.

Of course, there's no way to know what the team will do about the RPG, but as I told in another topic, L5R needs to keep its distinct identity. I'll take again the D20 attempt as an example, if it's simply a "reskin" of another game, why people would switch? Specially when there's way more roleplay restriction element in L5R than in Star Wars or Warhammer RPG. For me, reskinnng a system for another setting means that it's a lower grade RPG. I honestly don't like the narrative system because I feel like I'm getting held by the hand to when I use the current system with my personal way of adding a "narrative system". Worst case, I'll stick with the 4th edition.

The one thing I'm pretty certain on is if they stay with roll'n'keep, it will not be to keep any old fan base, because the old fan base was insufficiently large enough to sustain an RPG line to begin with (otherwise, the IP wouldn't have been sold).see.

The RPG fanbase is actually big enough to support the RPG line . It has been traditionally pretty hot stuff, as far as I know: supplements sell very well, with the most recent example being the Atlas of Rokugan. The real problem was that the RPG found itself on the sideline, while the CCG was tasked to carry the franchise - and when the RPG went down in the drain, many fans left because they were not interested in the CCG-dominated setting (this then spawned the "Rokugan Your Way" phenomenon as far as I can tell).

Making a strong start with the RPG would be a pretty good idea, because L5R kinda has a monopoly in samurai RPGs, with the only real alternative being the cookie-cutter GURPS. Tho keeping R&K is kinda essential, because if they go with their slow-as-snail special dice system then they will gut the game i nterms of mechanics/theme interaction.

The one thing I'm pretty certain on is if they stay with roll'n'keep, it will not be to keep any old fan base, because the old fan base was insufficiently large enough to sustain an RPG line to begin with (otherwise, the IP wouldn't have been sold).

One thing for sure, is they need to look back at the D20 attempt, which totally failed. This attempt was to reach more people but it was only seen as another supplement like the other.

Well, Rokugan d20 came out during the great 3.0 OSL explosion of the initial onslaught of Third Edition D&D Products; during which, by a coincidence of ineptitude, the business decisions Ryan Dancey made while at AEG so destroyed the Rokugan IP that they allowed him to buy it cheap when he was at Wizards (which is why L5R was owned by Wizards of the Coast for a while). As D&D 3.0 was Ultimate Hot at the time, and they were redoing all the old First Edition D&D hits under the new 3.0 skin, using Rokugan as the setting for their 3.0 revamp of Oriental Adventures was far too easy and obvious. So it wasn't an attempt to make Rokugan into d20 rules; it was an attempt to continue to extend the endless reach of 3.0 D&D, which gobbled up Rokugan willy-nilly. If it hadn't been Rokugan, it'd been Kara-Tur again.

So it's not like the designers of Oriental Adventures 3.0 had a grand scheme of making Rokugan a d20 setting (although I'm sure they were fine with the idea); Rokugan was the new IP Wizards had gained, 3.0 was unbelievably popular, and this was a way to cross-promote both.

The one thing I'm pretty certain on is if they stay with roll'n'keep, it will not be to keep any old fan base, because the old fan base was insufficiently large enough to sustain an RPG line to begin with (otherwise, the IP wouldn't have been sold).see.

Making a strong start with the RPG would be a pretty good idea, because L5R kinda has a monopoly in samurai RPGs, with the only real alternative being the cookie-cutter GURPS. Tho keeping R&K is kinda essential, because if they go with their slow-as-snail special dice system then they will gut the game i nterms of mechanics/theme interaction.

L5R is far from a monopoly in samurai RPGs, although it's probably the most popular Western one, thanks to its links to the CCG. Just looking at my shelf, both Sengoku and the Usaji Yojimbo games were quite playable, reasonably popular (for independent games), and had their own quite loyal and rabid fanbases (Sengoku won a number of awards the years it was actively being published, for instance).

The FFG house system is, if anything, faster in resolution than the roll'n'keep system, so I'm not seeing where you are claiming it's slow-as-snails, let alone how the roll'n'keep system is in any way a mechanical link to the thematics of L5R. Betting against yourself is not a mechanic unique to roll'n'keep, and there was nothing in the earlier editions of L5R RPG that linked rolling a bunch of d10s thematically to Rokugan in any way.

Personally, I like the Roll & Keep system for reasons beyond simply legacy. It allows for a precision of skill which is actually very thematic to a game about human beings striving towards a divine perfection that they can only achieve is momentary transience.

I have experimented a lot with making Roll & Keep more playable. It is not a perfect system, but the ability to pick and choose your results, as well as betting on how well you can roll. Also, the damage system is absolutely deadly, and that is a good part of the system.

Regarding other Samurai Drama RPGs, I highly recommend John Wick's "Blood & Honor" RPG. It has been influenced in the right ways by FATE Core, and you build your PC Samurai as part of a Clan of Samurai. You do not earn rewards for your samurai. You earn rewards for your Clan. As you grow in strength, the better the rewards you can earn for your Clan.

L5R is far from a monopoly in samurai RPGs

It does not have a true monopoly in the strictest sense, but I think it is the single samurai RPG with a living ruleset. Also, the CCG probably only hurt its popularity. Like, I've seen some videos from the golden age, and oh boy I can see where that was going.

The FFG house system is, if anything, faster in resolution than the roll'n'keep system

I strongly disagree. Those five sessions I had with the special dice system were all my single longest games in my whole RPG career. And I'm a guy who has played FATAL. The whole process of the GM assessing the situation, picking his dice, the player doing the same, everyone rolling, comparing/subtracting/calculating results (on two axis no less!), and then waiting for the GM to work out what's happening is crazy slow, especially if the group has a knack for detail. Of course, this fits the style of Star Wars, because action tends to be slow-paced there with a focus on cinematic presentation, but L5R is not such kind of a game. L5R should be fast (even faster than now in my opinion) and simple: roll the dice, meet the TN (or not), succeed (or not) - the details should be up to the character and story and not the dice.

I highly recommend John Wick's "Blood & Honor" RPG.

As someone who had the questionable luck of trying out B&H, I want to add that it might be the most niche RPG in existence, and I'm 900% serious here. Approach with caution.

I really hope FFG does do an RPG for L5R. That is what is most important to me.

As far as rules, I would be okay with most any direction. Roll-and-keep is a very elegant system. I loved 3E®. I did not get a chance to play 4E (and probably won't since rulebooks are out of sight, both in availability and price). Comparing the two, I favor the skills list from 3E while appreciating the redesigned families and schools from 4E. I'd be happy if they reprinted 4E or developed 5E.

I really like the Star Wars RPG rules & dice from FFG. I have been playing the RPG since Edge of the Empire Beta, and I really love the entirety of the system. I feel that the same or similar system (perhaps borrowing some ideas from Warhammer) with rebranded dice could be used for L5R. Jedi ( jidai ?) are basically space samurai/shugenja/sohei.

Whatever they choose, I just hope FFG creates/continues an L5R RPG.

As someone who had the questionable luck of trying out B&H, I want to add that it might be the most niche RPG in existence, and I'm 900% serious here. Approach with caution.

I will not deny that it is NICHE as HELL. Not the most niche RPG I have played (Call of Cathulhu, where you are house cats trying to save humans from eldritch horror, but you're still a house cat? Penny for my Thoughts, where we are RPing a group therapy session, trying to piece together each other's traumatic memories through the power of Jungian collective subconsicous? Machine Zeist, where you are exploring haunted space stations? I can go on... I was an RPG reviewer for a website, after all...)

Niche is not always bad. I thought it had a good approach to the concept that you are not playing your samurai for yourself, but for something greater. It is something that, sadly, L5R has no mechanical way of expressing.

I have to say if they go with the WHF/SW engine for the new game I will be done with buying new L5R books.

Its not that I don't like the system its great for SW, but I just can't justify buying books that don't work with all the other books I have for the L5R system (I have all but one "the first gencon adventure")

We have a pretty strong following here where I live and everyone I know has said the same thing "If they lose the Roll/Keep system I'm done"

now on to the Roll/Keep system itself

I find that both 3rd and 4th editions had pros and cons

what is funny is that most cons of one edition where pros in the other

3rd Pros

1. fluid initiative system. if you don't get hit your score goes up so you can defend and wait for and opening to attack

2. flowing school system. alternative paths had links for you school back or to another school

3. weapons had flavor both mechanically and in the text.

3rd Cons

1. school blot

2. to many skills need to function in some careers

3. to many advantages/disadvantages.

4. spell casting was to weak

5. some really over powered schools/paths (Mirumoto Swordsman I'm looking at you)

4th Pros

1. fewer schools. got rid of the blot and some of the over powered paths

2. cleaner over all system

3. better life expectancy in combat. the x5 for the first rank helped alot

4. stronger spell casting (Maho still needs some help though)

5. less skills and more synergy with the schools

6. less advantages/disadvantages. and a disadvantages is truly a disadvantages.

4th Cons

1. stagnant initiative system. if you don't get to go first you spend void or your out of luck.

2. flat school system. alternative paths now replace parts of your school

3. weapons flavor gone. all weapons except Katanas are just damage numbers now. and with no reach pole-arms are just useless

so IMHO if your going to do a 5th Ed Roll/Keep you have to take the Pros from both version and combined them and you will get a great game

Niche is not always bad. I thought it had a good approach to the concept that you are not playing your samurai for yourself, but for something greater. It is something that, sadly, L5R has no mechanical way of expressing.

Well, with niche I was thinking about "everyone in the gaming group should play exactly the same game". My group was no such group, and we had a geisha house filled with catgirls, ridiculously crazy combat maneuvers, and the PCs killing each other while trying to overthrow their lord. It was an intriguing but fairly annoying game .

Fewer schools per clan is fine, but having more choices within that school would work wonders. Even something relatively simple as WoW's current talent system (3 choices per tier) can work. Yes, it would have to be balanced but that's the same for every system or mechanic.

I'm a proponent of giving each Great Clan a set of 4 schools, each with a single Technique which scales with your Insight rank. Unless you get special training (read: alternative path at a higher insight rank), you graduate your dojo with the knowledge of how your School functions and do no have to go back and retrain every few months to unlock a new ability. You just get better at the abilities you have. At higher Insight ranks, you are better at your initial School and can learn specific mechanics to make your character specialized. These mechanics are represented by additional Kata for bushi, Kiho for monks, Spells for shugenja, and social gambits for Courtiers.

Do we know that Insight will still exist under a different rpg developer? If it doesn't, what alternatives can it replace?

Do we know that Insight will still exist under a different rpg developer? If it doesn't, what alternatives can it replace?

Isn't part of the IP itself, just like all the Ring concept and the R&K?

However, in both case, I don't feel it's a problem because I feel like it's a very generic concept. I feel it's kinda like the victory of Samsung against Apple on the graphical concept if: "Rounded rectangle screen with a grid of icon on a black screen." Yes, I agree it's not the same thing but just look at the concept for both case. So calculating a progression step based on character trait feels very generic to me, compared to the specific way of the R&K system. So I don't think it should be a real problem. However, they sold the entire IP with the system to FFG, so I don't think it should be a problem.