9 minutes ago, Ryoshun Higoka said:

Again, layers upon layers. The decision tree looks like (with the limited info we have) a very complex, but still accessible, one. Throwing away a few bits of fodder to find out what your opponent's provinces contain is a valid tactic - and again, as jj48 pointed out, it's more about tactics and strategy in-game than in deck building.

I'm wondering what implications the fate system will have on the Dynasty draw (and above that, deck construction ratios). You no longer need to include an economy chain in your deck, so that frees up 18 or so required slots depending on the era we're talking about. Do most of those slots become characters? Utility? Something else that is essentially required? Something else that is completely optional? They haven't revealed what the mulligan might look like, though they hinted somewhere that there might be one. It's too early to have any real answers to those questions, but they are interesting questions to know exist.

4 minutes ago, Ryoshun Higoka said:

The Sabretooth CCG he referenced before was a pretty good attempt at making the miniatures into cards. And it was fun! (And then Sabretooth got reabsorbed, dissolved, and poof went the game, along with a really neat LotR miniatures game).

Replacing currency with Fate - there's a Magic variant called "Speedchoice" that I love to play. At the beginning of the game, you get 5 mana in your mana pool of any combination of colors you like. Unspent mana stays in your pool from turn to turn. During your draw phase, you fill your hand to seven cards. Your deck must be 40 or more cards, with no more than 2 rares and 6 uncommons. Everything else is the same. It's fast and requires building a very different deck than a regular magic game, and it feels somewhat similar to this new L5R concept. There's no gold shortage. There's no gold glut. Everyone gets the same amount of "bring-into-play" resources - it all comes down to how you choose to spend them.

As for the cycling of characters, I like your point of investiture. It'll be up to you how long your favorite mook stays around, and that's a neat idea.

And your story at the end... those are the games of L5R that I love, past and (hopefully) future!

Ha! I was basically typing the response to this as you were typing. Interesting questions.

38 minutes ago, Ryric said:

I expect to see some people at least try the strategy of brining out nothing on turn one, letting their opponent have their way with province that turn, then having a turn two of epic proportions for a big swing back.

For example, you draw conflict cards after buying dynasty - do you start with an opening hand? We don't know. It makes a big difference if I know what I want to spend fate on in my hand before I spend it on peeps.

I'm also curious how many, if any, conflict cards carry over to the next turn. Does it make sense to hoard, or might you draw your awesome power card too early and be forced to discard it?

*sigh* Why did I choose to own a business and set my own schedule during announcement week? Someone save me from the rabbit hole.

It's also interesting how attachments like equipment are now surprise mid-battle things. I am looking forward to declaring "Ninja tetsubo!" when suddenly hooking someone up with a big metal club.

2 minutes ago, Ryric said:

It's also interesting how attachments like equipment are now surprise mid-battle things. I am looking forward to declaring "Ninja tetsubo!" when suddenly hooking someone up with a big metal club.

From your reading did it seem like attachments were persistent, or did they go away at the end of turn?

2 minutes ago, Kiseki said:

From your reading did it seem like attachments were persistent, or did they go away at the end of turn?

I got the impression that they are persistent, but I'm not sure we have the information to back up that feeling.

1 minute ago, Ryric said:

I got the impression that they are persistent, but I'm not sure we have the information to back up that feeling.

Ok, I got the same impression, but then realized that I wasn't completely sure.

3 minutes ago, Ryric said:

I got the impression that they are persistent, but I'm not sure we have the information to back up that feeling.

They likely leave with the character, though. Or maybe not! They may stick around to be attached to someone else - that would be a neat, flavorful trick, a la someone picking up their father's sword...!

2 minutes ago, Ryoshun Higoka said:

They likely leave with the character, though. Or maybe not! They may stick around to be attached to someone else - that would be a neat, flavorful trick, a la someone picking up their father's sword...!

That was actually the next mental exercise I did. It threw me for such a loop when I got back attachments in Thrones.

I might have to poke fun at the flavor of the game if people are transient but material possessions endure forever...

Maybe you'll be able to remove a fate counter from someone else to reattach an item to someone else? Or if not a game mechanic maybe there will be an item or character with that ability?

1 minute ago, Ryric said:

I might have to poke fun at the flavor of the game if people are transient but material possessions endure forever...

There's some precedent for that, though - remember that in Rokugan, the clan swords are handed down from clan champion to clan champion, and every samurai inherits his/her grandfather's/grandmother's sword.

16 minutes ago, Ryric said:

I got the impression that they are persistent, but I'm not sure we have the information to back up that feeling.

Surely the weapons, armors, spells and such will remain as long as the character does. Characters brought from the conflict deck tough... depend on if they can get extra fate too?

4 minutes ago, Ryoshun Higoka said:

There's some precedent for that, though - remember that in Rokugan, the clan swords are handed down from clan champion to clan champion, and every samurai inherits his/her grandfather's/grandmother's sword.

Swords, yes. Armor, sure. Stylish fashion? Magical tattoos? Some things make a little less sense.

1 minute ago, Wintersong said:

Surely the weapons, armors, spells and such will remain as long as the character does. Characters brought from the conflict deck tough... depend on if they can get extra fate too?

If they ported over the attachment system from GoT, then attachments pop back to hand when a character leaves play unless that attachment has a specific keyword which we did not see in any of the previews.

I have mixed feelings about that system.

Just now, Ryric said:

Swords, yes. Armor, sure. Stylish fashion? Magical tattoos? Some things make a little less sense.

"Here, son, I pass my Tiger Tattoo down to you!"

*Ripping noise*

"Ah, no thanks, dad, I'll just go get my own..."

2 minutes ago, Wintersong said:

Surely the weapons, armors, spells and such will remain as long as the character does. Characters brought from the conflict deck tough... depend on if they can get extra fate too?

That last bit is an interesting question too. If there is no opportunity during the conflict phase to add fate to a character, that makes it an interesting play. Also, will there be a separate set of personalities with the corresponding back that go in the conflict deck, or how will that work?

On 4/20/2017 at 9:01 AM, Suzume Tomonori said:

As someone who has never played Ivory Edition I am curious, what was it about that edition that killed the game scene do you think?

Ivory edition came with a massive rule set change and a massive design philosophy change.

First and foremost gold pooling altered the way you purchased things. You really didn't have to think about how you'd assign your holdings as much, and raw gold amount became more important. This came with the design philosophy change that every clan should pay the same gold for each point of force on a personality. This point IMO is where design really crapped the bed. They didn't change who went first, so suddenly clans that always went first were producing force at the same rate as clans that always went second. They also removed the blood money rule (where you could pay extra to ignore honor requirements on personalities and proceeded to print otherwise playable personalities that required 2-3 turns of proclaiming your 1 to 2 ph personalities before you could buy a 3/3 with an ability. Fate wise it was basically an array of bow or straighten and +2 or -2 force pumps. Ivory edition was basically gold edition without any of the powerful or fun cards included. It was the Hida Kuroda nonexp of arcs.

6 minutes ago, Ryoshun Higoka said:

There's some precedent for that, though - remember that in Rokugan, the clan swords are handed down from clan champion to clan champion, and every samurai inherits his/her grandfather's/grandmother's sword.

I wonder if there might be attachments both in the dynasty and conflict decks. The ones in the conflict deck might be more transitory (like spells or minor items), while the dynasty deck has more significant items (like clan weapons/armor), that have a more significant investment to bring into play, but last longer.

1 minute ago, Kiseki said:

That last bit is an interesting question too. If there is no opportunity during the conflict phase to add fate to a character, that makes it an interesting play. Also, will there be a separate set of personalities with the corresponding back that go in the conflict deck, or how will that work?

Vengeful Oathkeeper (in one preview) is a conflict card personality. I must assume he has conflict card back.

Another thing from the interview video: That big red token from the game shot on the showcase page. That token is not the Imperial Favor (which is what I first thought). When starting a conflict, you choose a token for the Ring you want, and place it on the target province. The side you place up determines whether the conflict is political or military.

Just now, Wintersong said:

Vengeful Oathkeeper (in one preview) is a conflict card personality. I must assume he has conflict card back.

Yeah, it was one of those things that I never gave any thought until I was literally responding to your post. My first thought was "You'd have to decide which personalities go in your dynasty, and which in your conflict deck..." and my second thought was "They probably have to print the ones that go in your conflict with the correct color back..."

3 minutes ago, Kiseki said:

That last bit is an interesting question too. If there is no opportunity during the conflict phase to add fate to a character, that makes it an interesting play. Also, will there be a separate set of personalities with the corresponding back that go in the conflict deck, or how will that work?

It looks a little like the personality/follower dynamics from L5R1. The lesser characters may be in the conflict deck while the major "named" characters might be in the dynasty deck.

Just now, Ryoshun Higoka said:

It looks a little like the personality/follower dynamics from L5R1. The lesser characters may be in the conflict deck while the major "named" characters might be in the dynasty deck.

Well, they have showed a lot of the vanilla characters in dynasty slots already. In my head I was mentally equating the conflict characters with the ambush mechanic from GoT, which might still have some merit, but it isn't quite the same.