5 minutes ago, kempy said:

Yeah i've found Onyx really nice to play. Especially with Lion, Spider and (corrupted) Scorpion.

Honestly nearly all L5R games i play nowadays are Onyx ones.

Sorry you never got that Shadowlands Nitoshi, but that set never even got to the layout phase.

Seriously I really envy FFG for being able to hack out elements of this game without worrying about the past cardpool and its effect on them. I loved designing L5R but so many of its gameplay elements were in need of modernization that we simply didn't have the leeway to do.

19 minutes ago, Tetsuro said:

Sorry you never got that Shadowlands Nitoshi, but that set never even got to the layout phase.

Seriously I really envy FFG for being able to hack out elements of this game without worrying about the past cardpool and its effect on them. I loved designing L5R but so many of its gameplay elements were in need of modernization that we simply didn't have the leeway to do.

You can just say you hated spells. We all know that's what you mean.

2 minutes ago, Nickciufi said:

You can just say you hated spells. We all know that's what you mean.

I always hated Items the most. You could do so many weird and unique things with spells, they could function as the engine for entire deck concepts. Anyone who's seen the Chuda cards from Onyx can tell you I quite loved spells.

Items were always just boring, especially at the lower rarities. How many different versions of a common sword do I have to make? It was always such a pain, which is why I always begged for the chance to make the rare Items and Followers.

I hope FFG streamlines attachments, if they don't just get rid of them entirely.

23 minutes ago, Tetsuro said:

I always hated Items the most. You could do so many weird and unique things with spells, they could function as the engine for entire deck concepts. Anyone who's seen the Chuda cards from Onyx can tell you I quite loved spells.

Items were always just boring, especially at the lower rarities. How many different versions of a common sword do I have to make? It was always such a pain, which is why I always begged for the chance to make the rare Items and Followers.

I hope FFG streamlines attachments, if they don't just get rid of them entirely.

Be honest: How many times did you just write 4gc +2f +1c and make up a random ability off the top of your head?

17 minutes ago, Nickciufi said:

Be honest: How many times did you just write 4gc +2f +1c and make up a random ability off the top of your head?

Enough to know I hated making low rarity Items (and followers that weren't Undead or Naga)

Sorry if I mislead anyone in to thinking I didn't want DUELING in the game. I meant that I didn't want that particular dueling mechanic in the game. Dueling is thematic for L5R, but I'd rather see it changed up than left as is.

5 minutes ago, Sparks Duh said:

Sorry if I mislead anyone in to thinking I didn't want DUELING in the game. I meant that I didn't want that particular dueling mechanic in the game. Dueling is thematic for L5R, but I'd rather see it changed up than left as is.

I don't think anyone disagrees with this sentiment. At least I'd be surprised if they did.

6 hours ago, Sparks Duh said:

Yeah, but why bother unless your deck was dueling?? Because it's just a trashy mechanic that needed to go a long time ago, but I figure it was only kept in the game because people would ***** about it leaving. And rest assured... only people who played dueling decks would *****. Everyone else who played the game would most likely cheer that the mechanic left the game.

I can never quite tell if your posts are sassy or passionate or petulant. But they can be quite off-putting. However, I've heard good things about you as a community member, so I suspend my disbelief.

6 hours ago, cielago said:

yeah, i agree with this. dueling isn't going anywhere, and it shouldn't its a part of the lore, and it can serve a function, namely as a way for decks that aren't primarily military to defend themselves. but control decks are extremely hard to do (see also: "dishonor is NPE, get rid of dishonor!" threads)

i think we're gonna see it simplified, possibly down to something as simple as a choice mechanic kind of like dishonor. "if your personality has lower chi than challenging personality, you may send home or take -X force" or things like that.

This was, more or less, my very train of thought.

2 minutes ago, FunTimeTeddy said:

I can never quite tell if your posts are sassy or passionate or petulant. But they can be quite off-putting. However, I've heard good things about you as a community member, so I suspend my disbelief.

This was, more or less, my very train of thought

4 hours ago, Tetsuro said:

I always hated Items the most. You could do so many weird and unique things with spells, they could function as the engine for entire deck concepts. Anyone who's seen the Chuda cards from Onyx can tell you I quite loved spells.

Items were always just boring, especially at the lower rarities. How many different versions of a common sword do I have to make? It was always such a pain, which is why I always begged for the chance to make the rare Items and Followers.

...

This... This might be one of the least insightful comments I've ever seen a (former) designer make.

You liked Spells better than items because they had "more design space?" Spells were Items with a built in "may only attach to a Shugenja" trait. Any weird/unique things you could have done with them you could have very easily done with items. As for "different versions of a common sword" Emperor and Ivory had a grant total of 15 common swords combined out of 42 common weapons which made up the majority of the 60 combined common items over 20 sets. In comparison there were 41 common spells over the same period.

You ended up working nearly as much on an attachment type that were only used by a little over 1/5th of the personality base as you did working on an attachment type usable by all most every personality.

14 minutes ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

...

This... This might be one of the least insightful comments I've ever seen a (former) designer make.

You liked Spells better than items because they had "more design space?" Spells were Items with a built in "may only attach to a Shugenja" trait. Any weird/unique things you could have done with them you could have very easily done with items. As for "different versions of a common sword" Emperor and Ivory had a grant total of 15 common swords combined out of 42 common weapons which made up the majority of the 60 combined common items over 20 sets. In comparison there were 41 common spells over the same period.

You ended up working nearly as much on an attachment type that were only used by a little over 1/5th of the personality base as you did working on an attachment type usable by all most every personality.

with all your long years in game design, i'm sure you're qualified to comment on what is and isn't insightful in ccg design.

that said, who can attach an item is the least relevant aspect.

an item is EXTREMELY constrained in what it can do, especially common and uncommon ones. melee this. ranged that. fear this. spells, on the other hand, had a wider design space. even common spells had access to movement, etc, things only rare weapons had. from a design perspective, that makes spells a lot more interesting.

Hmmm. Thinking hard; conflicted; appreciating multiple points of view...

24 minutes ago, cielago said:

with all your long years in game design, i'm sure you're qualified to comment on what is and isn't insightful in ccg design.

I have a funny story.

It was in September 2012 at the 2012 Emerald Championship Tournament. I had been playing Crane Dueling Magistrate and lamenting the lack of low cost Chi boosters with 4FV i could use. The only ones legal at the time below 4G were The Black Pearl and Spirit of the Truth. All others were 7G or 8G.

During one of the longer breaks between rounds I went up to Brian Reese who was running the tournament. I asked him a simple question, "Why is there a lack of 4G or less 4FV +1C cards?" He, confused, went to a computer and did an Oracle search. He was flabbergasted when only 3 legal cards and one not yet legal card, all unique with 2 being Clan restricted, were returned. He said he didn't know. I had just pointed out a pretty obvious problem with the card pool.

8 months later (a bit more than a set's dev cycle) in May of 2013, the Imperial Herald Promos were sent out. Within was Family Sword. A +3F/+1C 4G 4FV Weapon.

24 minutes ago, cielago said:

that said, who can attach an item is the least relevant aspect.

Emperor Edition had 127 items, 123 followers total and 133 spells. It had 810 personalities with 183 of those personalities being Shugenja. 22.6% of the personalities got 34.7% of the attachments. This is important as it demonstrates an imbalance in design space use.

1 hour ago, cielago said:

an item is EXTREMELY constrained in what it can do, especially common and uncommon ones. melee this. ranged that. fear this. spells, on the other hand, had a wider design space. even common spells had access to movement, etc, things only rare weapons had. from a design perspective, that makes spells a lot more interesting.

Not all items are weapons.

Armors were under utilized. There plenty of potential ways for them to protect personalities as well as be inspirational and/or intimidating.

More items could have supported courtiers. Various Gifts, Kimonos, Toys, Legal Writs and Games.

Some items could have even been Mounts which could have given cavalry and movement tricks.

There was a massive amount of unused design space in items.

The problem in that case may have been a combination of:

1)The need for items to *make sense*. A sword is expected to do swordy things. "Limited: Search your fate deck for a card, put it in your hand, then shuffle your fate deck" is not a swordy thing. Spells can be whatever they please.

2)Items, particularly cheap one, having to fullfill a specific role as a source of force (and chi, but mostly force) bonuses for sealed, draft and new players. This limits design's ability to make non-weapon items (that might make sense with more spell like abilities). You might have (say) an item called "Scroll Collection" with the Walkign the Way ability - but it wouldn't make sense as a +2F +1C item (and would probably be a rare).

3)The fact that spells come with a built-in restriction whereas items come with no such thing, drastically reducing the opportunity cost of using them. If you want to "throw in" Walking the Way, you need shugenja in your deck, and at least 6-9 of them. If you want "Iteming the Way" in your deck, you can just throw in three and be done with it. This drastically limits using items as engine to power decks, unless you really want every clan to be able to run that engine...or, of course, unless you want to make that item "Attach only to X". In which case it's basically a spell for another character class.

26 minutes ago, Himoto said:

1)The need for items to *make sense*. A sword is expected to do swordy things. "Limited: Search your fate deck for a card, put it in your hand, then shuffle your fate deck" is not a swordy thing. Spells can be whatever they please.

As an Item that could have been Meditative Incense or a Spell Scroll item named Walking the Way. Or it could have been a 4G Shugenja strategy once attaching Spellls granted additional actions.

30 minutes ago, Himoto said:

2)Items, particularly cheap one, having to fullfill a specific role as a source of force (and chi, but mostly force) bonuses for sealed, draft and new players. This limits design's ability to make non-weapon items (that might make sense with more spell like abilities). You might have (say) an item called "Scroll Collection" with the Walkign the Way ability - but it wouldn't make sense as a +2F +1C item (and would probably be a rare).

Actually it could have been a +0/+0 4G Uncommon item with a "will only attach to a Shugenja" trait. Not every item needs to have Force or Chi and quite a few did not have any.

32 minutes ago, Himoto said:

3)The fact that spells come with a built-in restriction whereas items come with no such thing, drastically reducing the opportunity cost of using them. If you want to "throw in" Walking the Way, you need shugenja in your deck, and at least 6-9 of them. If you want "Iteming the Way" in your deck, you can just throw in three and be done with it. This drastically limits using items as engine to power decks, unless you really want every clan to be able to run that engine...or, of course, unless you want to make that item "Attach only to X". In which case it's basically a spell for another character class.

Simply having a rulebook trait of Spell Scroll "will only attach to a Shugenja" would cover that. Spells were just items with the assumption of "will only attach to a Shugenja" and no assumed Force or Chi bonuses (though many spells did get traits that gave those out) built in with a different card template.

Were you replying to what I said, or just quoting me while replying to stuff I never actually said?

The whole *point* of #2 is that if your items aren't giving permanent force (and chi) pump, then you don't HAVE permanent force pumps. Sure, you can have a few items that don't, but the "stat boost" role is a critical design role that items needed to fulfill (especially at the lower rarity). That limits design space for common items a lot. Yes, you can make a +0/+0 item, I already said that . But if you do, you don't have a way to turn Matsu Munchmaster into a province-taking threat at the pre-release tournament.

Your answer on #3 is completely and utterly unrelated to anything I actually SAID in #3, which is that an item that can attach to anyone (in contrast to an item/spell that's shugenja only) has a lower opportunity cost for using in your deck, and therefore is more limited in terms of power levels.

16 minutes ago, Himoto said:

Were you replying to what I said, or just quoting me while replying to stuff I never actually said?

The whole *point* of #2 is that if your items aren't giving permanent force (and chi) pump, then you don't HAVE permanent force pumps. Sure, you can have a few items that don't, but the "stat boost" role is a critical design role that items needed to fulfill (especially at the lower rarity). That limits design space for common items a lot. Yes, you can make a +0/+0 item, I already said that . But if you do, you don't have a way to turn Matsu Munchmaster into a province-taking threat at the pre-release tournament.

Your answer on #3 is completely and utterly unrelated to anything I actually SAID in #3, which is that an item that can attach to anyone (in contrast to an item/spell that's shugenja only) has a lower opportunity cost for using in your deck, and therefore is more limited in terms of power levels.

I apologize. I misread your post as disagreeing with me on that Spells were a waste of design space and that they were far to weapon focused when designing items.

To your point #2, you are forgetting followers (also permanent force pump) and all 5 of the common items in sets such as The New Order did not need to be weapons one or more of them could have been Armor. 10 of the 13 items in that set did not need to be Weapons. Several of those permanent force pumps could have been Armors or other types of items. Complaining about lack of design space in items and then making a bunch of common swords when they could have been other types of things in those same slots is a good example of putting themselves in a box and then complaining about the box.

As for #3, the limiting factor is a stupid reason for giving an attachment type its own template. Other cards used by various personality types had limiting factors as well but did not get their own unique template and special section in the design space. Should Ninja Fate cards have had a special template? Heck, Terrains (which used the standard strategy template) were more deserving of a unique template than spells which tended more often than not to be shugenja exclusive +0/+0 items or strategies. Giving spells their own template put the idea in the designers head that "because these cards look different they must have a different design space than other cards even though they are used in the exact same way as other cards."

Ah, all these Item/Spell fusions...

6 hours ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

...

This... This might be one of the least insightful comments I've ever seen a (former) designer make.

You liked Spells better than items because they had "more design space?" Spells were Items with a built in "may only attach to a Shugenja" trait. Any weird/unique things you could have done with them you could have very easily done with items. As for "different versions of a common sword" Emperor and Ivory had a grant total of 15 common swords combined out of 42 common weapons which made up the majority of the 60 combined common items over 20 sets. In comparison there were 41 common spells over the same period.

You ended up working nearly as much on an attachment type that were only used by a little over 1/5th of the personality base as you did working on an attachment type usable by all most every personality.

Sorry you feel that way, it was meant more as an anecdote than some deep insight into the nature of design theory.

The reality was because there was a mandate for a focus on draft in Ivory and later Onyx, that low rarity Items and Followers (which is what I was sure to specify) needed to generally speaking produce simpler effects, and had to be more universally useful, which tended to make them a bit generic. Because x number of cards per set were items or followers, you tended, after a while to have common items and followers that sort of all blended together, and it became a bit of a challenge to keep trying to make them interesting or unique. When you get up to the uncommon and rare items, though, you will get to see some of those more nonstandard items and effects that I was talking about looking forward to making (Aramasu's Mask, Regal Furisode, Official Sanction, things like that).

Due to how limited they were in terms of being able to be used in draft, spells tended to be higher rarity, and thus we had a little more flexibility to make their effects nonstandard, or things that might be kind of useless in a draft environment.

Idon't think dueling would change a lot. I always thought it was a reference when FFG released some blind-bet mechanics, like edge battles in SWLCG or warlord dial in Conquest. Wird is that they removed the way tracing worked in Netrunner.

1 hour ago, Barbacuo said:

Wird is that they removed the way tracing worked in Netrunner.

They changed it a lot from the CCG. In the LCG, it's all open, the Corp pays first and there is no limit. FFG introduced a blind-bet mechanic later on Corp cards: each player blind bets up to 2 credits and the result depends on whether the bets match (this obviously favors the Corp, since not matching is more likely).

If true, that doesn't sound very promising...

1 hour ago, kempy said:

If you missed some interesting insights (or trolling) at reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/l5r/comments/5wy4dc/its_a_reboot_boys/

I've just separated most important lines: http://www.chikan.pl/index.php?topic=8767.msg120567#msg120567

le sigh. okay, so first, can we stop reposting every garbage, unsourced thing claiming to have the inside track? first it was the goofball on 4chan not like 2 days after the sale. then it was the comments on the picture attributed to some nameless "developer", now this. got a source? post it. otherwise, eff off.

second, you can skip the reddit link. until i have a better idea of how FFG is going to interact with fan communities, i'm erring on the side of caution and taking a hard line against anything that claims to break NDA, so the comments have been removed. i have to imagine that when an FFG mod notices the post above, it will be similarly.

1 hour ago, cielago said:

le sigh. okay, so first, can we stop reposting every garbage, unsourced thing claiming to have the inside track? first it was the goofball on 4chan not like 2 days after the sale. then it was the comments on the picture attributed to some nameless "developer", now this. got a source? post it. otherwise, eff off.

second, you can skip the reddit link. until i have a better idea of how FFG is going to interact with fan communities, i'm erring on the side of caution and taking a hard line against anything that claims to break NDA, so the comments have been removed. i have to imagine that when an FFG mod notices the post above, it will be similarly.

Appreciated. I know we're all jonesing for info, but let's be patient and not violate legal procedures in order to find things out a few weeks early. It'll all come out in due time.

Well, here is how a Game of Thrones card game works. A demonstration from FFG's own YouTube channel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1s54Wlgfyo

And a more comedic tutorial
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPs57td0YLw

Quite honestly, I could see how a lot of this would work quite well for the L5R setting. It'd be an adjustment, no doubt. But, sure-- you have "military", "honor" and "dishonor opponent" baked right in there. Not really sure how one would handle enlightenment... and it seems like the "rings" would no longer be cards in the game unless they were somehow incorporated.

But, no more dynasty slots, instead you put your personalities, items, followers and strategy cards (which you use fewer of) straight from your hand. Your event cards effectively become your stronghold for each turn, changing your gold value, initiative and maximum hand size each turn as well as having a special effect. And you get to choose which order you play them in.

And the only part of the post on Kempy's second link that set off alarm bells as the game would "miss the point" doesn't appear to be a feature of the A Game of Thrones gameplay at all.

I can certainly live with the idea that both dueling and military action ultimately just eliminate personalities from the board and are in no way distinct things. Other than dueling being its own little mini-game within a game it functionally wasn't terribly different from Fear or Ranged/Melee Attacks in battle... or, assassination, in the cases you could do it in the limited phase.

So, sure. Dividing the clans up between specializing in some combination of Military, Intrigue and Power (i.e. Honor) and then have individual card text supporting if they are better at attacking or defending against it. So you could have...

Crab - Almost pure Military (Yasuki cards bring in Intrigue)
Crane - Almost pure Honor (Daidoji and Kakita offers military, particularly in defense)
Dragon - Balance of all three, particularly strong in defending
Lion - Military/Honor, best on offense
Mantis - Offensive Military/Defensive Intrigue
Phoenix - Military/Honor, best on defense
Scorpion - Almost pure Intrigue (Ninja bring in some offensive Military)
Shadowlands/Spider - Military/Offensive Intrigue
Unicorn - Balance, best on offense

Otomo/Seppun/Miya - Honor/Defensive Intrigue
Ronin, Naga, Ratling, etc. - Pure Military

With the understanding that no faction is going to be 100% vulnerable to any of the particular three strategies and that there will be additional complexities on the character cards.