42 minutes ago, Silverfox13 said:All of your dynasty and fate cards had to be geared towards the duel victory.
Wait... what??
There was a time when dueling was its own victory??? That's INSANE!!!!! I've only known Military, Honor, Dishonor, and Enlightenment to be the only rulebook victories.
5 minutes ago, Sparks Duh said:Wait... what??
There was a time when dueling was its own victory??? That's INSANE!!!!! I've only known Military, Honor, Dishonor, and Enlightenment to be the only rulebook victories.
Its the sense of superiority Crane and Dragon decks get because they are dueling. It is a moral victory.
Its like driving a hybrid or electric car.
I am Crane.
The Perfect Strike.
The Perfect Stroke.
The Perfect Word.
The spiritual moment when preparation meets opportunity, the opportunity is seized and conquered with perfection.
Dueling is Life.
Dueling is L5R.
Edited by Daner002313 hours ago, Sparks Duh said:Wait... what??
There was a time when dueling was its own victory??? That's INSANE!!!!! I've only known Military, Honor, Dishonor, and Enlightenment to be the only rulebook victories.
It was just a variation on the Honour-runner deck. Unlike the pure runner, which used send-home as a defense, Duelling would try to kill your personalities instead to prevent you from having enough force to destroy all your provinces.
One of the fun things about running a Phoenix dueller was having Crane or Dragon challenge me , and then winning their duel using Strike with No Thought or Bend like a Reed.
15 hours ago, Daner0023 said:I am Crane.
The Perfect Strike.
The Perfect Stroke.
The Perfect Word.
The spiritual moment when preparation meets opportunity, the opportunity is seized and conquered with perfection.
Dueling is Life.
Dueling is L5R.
Shouldn't this be a Haiku?
I Am Crane hear me!
My caws are loud! My sword sharp!
No! Don't Stain my Gi!
Cavalry, Tactician, Naval, Duelist, Shugenja, Tireless, Resilient, courtesy, yu, conqueror, expandable, destined, reserve, kensai (forgot any?)
Which ones would you like to stay in the game?
8 minutes ago, L5RBr said:(forgot any?)
Ninjutsu, Double Chi, Elite, Stalwart, Overconfident, Compassion, Honor, Singular, Remote, Absent, Enlightened, Brash...
Experienced (KYD) vs Experienced 2!
3 minutes ago, sndwurks said:Experienced (KYD) vs Experienced 2!
What about Inexperienced?
While most are valid in terms of a gameplay concept, I think keywords with rulebook effects are clumsy, with the exception of a few basic and prevalent ones, like Courtier, Samurai and Shugenja. Generally, the more that can be printed on the card, the better. That way you don't have to remember the exact wording/effect.
19 hours ago, Sparks Duh said:Wait... what??
There was a time when dueling was its own victory??? That's INSANE!!!!! I've only known Military, Honor, Dishonor, and Enlightenment to be the only rulebook victories.
You are taking Duel Victory out of context, but I think you know that.
And this is my point, dueling was just one way of achieving one of the core rulebook victories, requiring much more effort to achieve. It's main focus was on Honor and Military win conditions, sometime Enlightenment, and rarely dishonor. All of these usually much more attainable with different methods.
20 hours ago, Mirith said:Most of the other stuff is fluff. Dueling would fall in the "Magical Samurai Theme", but doesn't (to me) need separate rules.
I understand your point and don't disagree that it shouldn't be a convoluted mechanic, but simply making a card that says "Target another character at this battle and challenge them to a duel, the x happens to target." doesn't really put any emphasis on the culture of dueling that L5R has always been famous for. Calvary required battles to add additional steps to assignment which was just as complicated and convoluted as dueling in many instances.
It will be interesting if they keep either of these mechanics and how they may change them.
11 minutes ago, Mirith said:While most are valid in terms of a gameplay concept, I think keywords with rulebook effects are clumsy, with the exception of a few basic and prevalent ones, like Courtier, Samurai and Shugenja. Generally, the more that can be printed on the card, the better. That way you don't have to remember the exact wording/effect.
it is true.
Still enjoyed the YU rule, could have it in all clans to mount defensive decks, fought a little the devastating effects of losing the battle, after all is a bit strange the dynamics of a battle where on one side dies everyone and the otherside remain unharmed (disregarding the actions that kill in the middle of the battle as ranged attacks).
I'm an old-school player who hasn't played in a long time - my last set was sometime in the Gold story arc - and I'm hoping to get back into L5R when the new cards come out. I've always loved the lore and story of L5R but the cost of keeping up with a CCG along with my faction (Monk) disappearing caused me to give up on the game. Looking forward to giving it a try in the LCG format.
I hope they retain some sort of Enlightenment win condition because that's really what drew me into the game in the first place. I suppose they must have some sort of Five Rings for there to be a Legend of.
I'm waffling on what clan to play - tried Dragon back when Monk was first eliminated, but never really got the vibe I liked from them. Maybe Phoenix? I presume we're at least keeping the 7 original major clans. One issue with a storyline that builds such faction loyalties as L5R is that it's hard to switch even when you have no choice.
16 hours ago, L5RBr said:Cavalry, Tactician, Naval, Duelist, Shugenja, Tireless, Resilient, courtesy, yu, conqueror, expandable, destined, reserve, kensai (forgot any?)
Which ones would you like to stay in the game?
16 hours ago, kempy said:Ninjutsu, Double Chi, Elite, Stalwart, Overconfident, Compassion, Honor, Singular, Remote, Absent, Enlightened, Brash...
Keep Cavary, Tactician, Shugenja, Tireless, Absent, Reserve, and Kensai. Maybe Expendable, Destined, and Singular. Ditch the rest.
15 hours ago, Silverfox13 said:You are taking Duel Victory out of context, but I think you know that.
And this is my point, dueling was just one way of achieving one of the core rulebook victories, requiring much more effort to achieve. It's main focus was on Honor and Military win conditions, sometime Enlightenment, and rarely dishonor. All of these usually much more attainable with different methods.
Didn't Enlightenment always need dueling? In most editions didn't the Ring of Fire going into play involve dueling?
On 3/24/2017 at 9:43 AM, L5RBr said:Cavalry, Tactician, Naval, Duelist, Shugenja, Tireless, Resilient, courtesy, yu, conqueror, expandable, destined, reserve, kensai (forgot any?)
Which ones would you like to stay in the game?
Honestly, from that list, I feel like Shugenja and Cavalry are the only two that need to be represented in the new game.
9 hours ago, shineyorkboy said:Didn't Enlightenment always need dueling? In most editions didn't the Ring of Fire going into play involve dueling?
I think Lotus was the only printing that did not require duels to play Ring of Fire.
I think keywords with Rulebook meanings are an unnecessary complication and homogenizes play styles.
I much prefer cards or abilities that target keywords.
I would be okay with seppuku as a rulebook effect that targets certain keywords, because it targets a huge percentage of personalities.
Instead of Cavalry having a rulebook effect, you could simply have it as a keyword on a card. Then a Unicorn Stronghold could have a trait targeting Cavalry giving them a movement or assignment advantage.
This is much cleaner and is much easier to teach.
Game of Thrones does fine with Stealth, Insight, Renown, and Intimidate. I've certainly never had an issue with teaching that to people. I think you're pushing it if you go much further, but I think half a dozen or so are easily handled.
Don't forget Dragon and Dragon Clan having no overlap, and the ever-so fun Human trait.
In Conquest are following keywords with rulebook effect: Limited, Ranged, Flying, Mobile, Brutal, Deep Strike, Ambush, Area Effect.
11 hours ago, shineyorkboy said:Didn't Enlightenment always need dueling? In most editions didn't the Ring of Fire going into play involve dueling?
Emperor Edition just required you to destroy cards or province(s) in resolution.
9 minutes ago, Kakita Shiro said:Emperor Edition just required you to destroy cards or province(s) in resolution.
And Lotus one:
@kempy @Hinomura FFG has no problem with rules-defined keywords (called just "keywords" in their games). They just keep them separate (visually and rules-wise) from descriptors (called traits in FFG games).
15 minutes ago, Khudzlin said:@kempy @Hinomura FFG has no problem with rules-defined keywords (called just "keywords" in their games). They just keep them separate (visually and rules-wise) from descriptors (called traits in FFG games).
I know. AEG used to print all of them in line, but " bold " to mark rulebook-oriented ones.
On 3/25/2017 at 1:03 PM, Daner0023 said:I think keywords with Rulebook meanings are an unnecessary complication and homogenizes play styles.
I much prefer cards or abilities that target keywords.
I would be okay with seppuku as a rulebook effect that targets certain keywords, because it targets a huge percentage of personalities.
Instead of Cavalry having a rulebook effect, you could simply have it as a keyword on a card. Then a Unicorn Stronghold could have a trait targeting Cavalry giving them a movement or assignment advantage.
This is much cleaner and is much easier to teach.
So then no clan except the Unicorn would be able to do Cavalry assignment unless explicitly allowed by another card? As much as I hate cavalry on principle, even I think that goes a bit too far in nerfing them.