40 minutes ago, Danwarr said:

Just because he has negative things to say doesn't mean that all of those things are wrong or don't need to be said.

Absolutely. Im just voicing my opinion that im having a much more

enjoyable experience after i choose not to read them.

1 hour ago, Danwarr said:

Seems more like a healthy amalgamation and update to the game to me. They kept Provinces, the dual deck system, Honor, and the theme.

Based on what's been revealed so far, these two are kind of the same thing.

What I mean is that if you strip away the theme, Honor is just a number that causes you to win if it reaches a certain value and to lose if it reaches a certain value. That's not a particularly unique mechanic in gaming.

I'd say the major things they've kept are:

1. The two decks
2. Provinces (albeit with major changes)
3. Multiple victory conditions
4. The IP

That's certainly not nothing, but the list is dwarfed by the things they've changed. It's an amalgamation of existing FFG LCG mechanics, new mechanics, and a sprinkling of the original game. That's hard for me to consider a mere update. It's something new.

3 minutes ago, Yoritomo Reiu said:

Based on what's been revealed so far, these two are kind of the same thing.

What I mean is that if you strip away the theme, Honor is just a number that causes you to win if it reaches a certain value and to lose if it reaches a certain value. That's not a particularly unique mechanic in gaming.

I'd say the major things they've kept are:

1. The two decks
2. Provinces (albeit with major changes)
3. Multiple victory conditions
4. The IP

That's certainly not nothing, but the list is dwarfed by the things they've changed. It's an amalgamation of existing FFG LCG mechanics, new mechanics, and a sprinkling of the original game. That's hard for me to consider a mere update. It's something new.

That's certainly a fair point. I just don't think that it's completely new because you can see the bones and soul of Old5R still in the design thought process. FFG really did overhaul a ton of things though. I would peg it as similar to Netrunner to ANR shift based on what I've read and seen of Old5R.

As for Honor, it is mildly different in that it's a number that isn't impacted by direct player conflict like say life in MTG.

54 minutes ago, oDESGOSTO said:

<snip>

So in summary, our conversation has gone like this:

oDESGOSTO: This new game is just a copy of AGoT!

JJ48: Maybe they're just using some of the same mechanics. See, it also has similarities to these other games.

oDESGOSTO: You're being dishonest! It's exactly like AGoT! ...also, there are some similarities to other games.

JJ48: <facepalm>

33 minutes ago, oDESGOSTO said:

But, and as being my catchphrase in these boards, time will tell.

Well, it's awfully nice of you to give the game a fair chance and not write it off as a failure before anyone's even had the chance to play it, or anything.

26 minutes ago, oDESGOSTO said:

You didn't played Classic Netrunner then...

The only mechanical tweak was the Trace mechanic. All the rest of the game remained the same.

Please point to me on the original Netrunner cards where the Faction identities, influence, and Unique designators are. Since Bad Publicity in the original Netrunner made you lose the game, while in new Netrunner it just gives the runner an economical advantage -- that's the same? In old Netrunner, you could incur an action penalty and then pay off those actions in future turns -- for instance, you could on click three use a card effect that cost you two clicks to play, and you'd "pay back" those clicks by losing them on your next, upcoming, turn. Old Netrunner had dice used to randomize card effects; current one does not. Original Netrunner, like original Magic, had zero mulligan rules: you were stuck with the hand you drew.

And that's just off the top of my head without having to look through my old cards.

ETA: I see Danwarr and I had much the same ideas, although it appears they did the clever thing and just searched for a list online, while I actually sat and stared at my old Netrunner card box with evil intent. I think Danwarr wins on efficiency points this time around! Bravo!

I would like to point out, that at this point, it is very very very hard to come up with a new, fun, interesting game mechanic. At this point, it feels like everything has been done before. It has either been discarded as being either not fun or still in use by someone, or still considered the best part of some game that failed. Look at all of the overly complicated board games coming out of kickstarter. They are trying to be unique, and sure they can be fun, but the micromanagement is getting pretty awful at this point, because there are no longer many options of clever ways to do stuff. When you take something even less interactive as a piece of heavy paper, it becomes much more difficult. So a lot of mechanics will repeat.

@oDESGOSTO So at this point, what is your point? As I see it, your opinion is since it is not CCG L5R, it won't be any good? And, even though it is different, it is too similar to other games, so it can't be fun?

If it means anything, I believe see/reading that the original game design for Agot had L5R in mind. So really, Agot is like L5R, not the other way around.

Been playing since Daini found the Naga

I was on a playtest team for the minis game. And still have 2 armies.

I played the RPG, and did the larps

I love the setting as much as the next player, but anyone who doesn't think this set is an improvement is smoking crack. The only questionable thing is resetting it to before the clan coup, and even that will probably be for the best.

53 minutes ago, Mirith said:

I would like to point out, that at this point, it is very very very hard to come up with a new, fun, interesting game mechanic. At this point, it feels like everything has been done before.

I strongly agree with this but once in a while someone comes up with a brilliant idea. They manage to create a fresh idea that the gaming community likes and everyone and their dog attempts to make a game using that mechanic. Deck Building games would be an example of this.

It is incredibly difficult to come up with something new but it is nice to see.

54 minutes ago, Mirith said:

I would like to point out, that at this point, it is very very very hard to come up with a new, fun, interesting game mechanic. At this point, it feels like everything has been done before. It has either been discarded as being either not fun or still in use by someone, or still considered the best part of some game that failed. Look at all of the overly complicated board games coming out of kickstarter. They are trying to be unique, and sure they can be fun, but the micromanagement is getting pretty awful at this point, because there are no longer many options of clever ways to do stuff. When you take something even less interactive as a piece of heavy paper, it becomes much more difficult. So a lot of mechanics will repeat.

This

You can apply that to visual art, music, writing, etc; the idea of creating something truly original in the world we live in today is a challenge in of itself. Now I'm getting flashbacks of my Postmodernism art class. lol

41 minutes ago, BuzzsawMF said:

If it means anything, I believe see/reading that the original game design for Agot had L5R in mind. So really, Agot is like L5R, not the other way around.

There's a slightly longer path there. Years ago I was demoing the AgoT ccg and I noted that it had a lot of similarities to the Dune ccg, at which point I was told by the designer that he had designed both of those games. The Dune ccg had some amount of similarity to L5R, with the "distinction" of being even more complex. So the trail is L5R ccg -> Dune ccg -> AGot ccg -> AGot LCG -> L5R LCG.

It's like how early CRPGs stole from D&D, and then later D&D stole from CRPGs.

1 hour ago, Gaffa said:

Please point to me on the original Netrunner cards where the Faction identities, influence, and Unique designators are. Since Bad Publicity in the original Netrunner made you lose the game, while in new Netrunner it just gives the runner an economical advantage -- that's the same? In old Netrunner, you could incur an action penalty and then pay off those actions in future turns -- for instance, you could on click three use a card effect that cost you two clicks to play, and you'd "pay back" those clicks by losing them on your next, upcoming, turn. Old Netrunner had dice used to randomize card effects; current one does not. Original Netrunner, like original Magic, had zero mulligan rules: you were stuck with the hand you drew.

And that's just off the top of my head without having to look through my old cards.

ETA: I see Danwarr and I had much the same ideas, although it appears they did the clever thing and just searched for a list online, while I actually sat and stared at my old Netrunner card box with evil intent. I think Danwarr wins on efficiency points this time around! Bravo!

As i wrote earlier. I can easily take nearly any old Netrunner card, treat is as neutral and it will be playable in A:NR. This should say for itself.

It's impossible in case of L5R CCG card in LCG. Becasue these games are completely different.

3 hours ago, kempy said:

these games are completely different.

A thing we've known for nearly a year now.

5 minutes ago, McDermott said:

A thing we've known for nearly a year now.

2 years ago. At the sale they said cards wouldn't be compatible.

4 hours ago, BlindSamurai13 said:

This

You can apply that to visual art, music, writing, etc; the idea of creating something truly original in the world we live in today is a challenge in of itself. Now I'm getting flashbacks of my Postmodernism art class. lol

Bah, one should not focus on creating something original, but rather on creating something GOOD.

1 minute ago, Robin Graves said:

Bah, one should not focus on creating something original, but rather on creating something GOOD.

Those two are not mutually exclusive. You can create something that is good and original.

1 minute ago, TechnoGolem said:

Those two are not mutually exclusive. You can create something that is good and original.

He's not claiming they are.

He is saying that you should focus more on doing something well and making it good rather than innovate for innovations sake.

Just now, TechnoGolem said:

Those two are not mutually exclusive. You can create something that is good and original.

Agreed, altough you eventualy will run out of things that are both new and good.

... unless human imagination truly is infinite, then we might never run out of good Original concepts. - "Oh dear I seem to have gone into philosoper mode."

2 minutes ago, BayushiCroy said:

He's not claiming they are.

He is saying that you should focus more on doing something well and making it good rather than innovate for innovations sake.

Yup! There's an old saying: Better well stolen than poorly invented.

Just now, Robin Graves said:

Agreed, altough you eventualy will run out of things that are both new and good.

... unless human imagination truly is infinite, then we might never run out of good Original concepts. - "Oh dear I seem to have gone into philosoper mode."

What is "Good"?

Just now, BayushiCroy said:

What is "Good"?

"God" with an extra letter. (used to piss of my atheist friend )

for another answer I'd say: "Anything can be conceived as good. or evil."

2 minutes ago, BayushiCroy said:

What is "Good"?

Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

But in terms of game design, good is keeping your players engaged in the game.

1 minute ago, GooeyChewie said:

Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

But in terms of game design, good is keeping your players engaged in the game.

It's not fair that I can only like this post once. I should be able to give it at least two. One for the game design bit, and one for the Conan reference.

15 minutes ago, Robin Graves said:

Bah, one should not focus on creating something original, but rather on creating something GOOD.

I agree. Something can be completely original and still be utter garbage. Something can also be a remake of something else and be very well done.

Just look at Walt Disney! He created an entire empire on taking classic, well-known stories and telling them in a way people enjoyed!