Cards, Agendas?, that allow you to recruit non-Unique Dinasty characters from Clan X seem a better choice than specific Strongholds.

As far as allowing out of clan characters could see it going either way. In Old5R you could purchase out of clan characters for more gold and there were other restrictions on meeting honor requirements. The rules changes slightly a couple times but cross clan purchasing was allowed. In Nu5R there will not be any honor requirements on characters so it's posible that they could cost extra fate and/or maybe even honor and I could even see some rules about how glory could be impacted.

Hoewever, since it appears that FFG is trying to ensure each clan has its own identity, I suspect we will only be allowed to use out of clan conflict cards. Personally I like this approach better. I can accept that from time to time a clan would borrow a technique/strategy/etc. from another clan if it helps their own agenda, even if it goes against the plan's core principles. But I've never really been a fan of the idea of mixing clans when clan identity was/is a major part of this game. I think it could also be a dangerous idea in terms of game balance of there ends up being a couple strong characters that everyone just crams into every deck because they can. You could end up with everyone playing nearly identical decks out of different clans and that would ruin a bit of the game for me. Or you end up with clans that could have a distinct advantage in doing that based on what is set as the criteria for using our of clan characters. I.e. if it costs extra honor, high honor clans are at an advantage so then they must be something else to balance it out so as not to alienate the other clans. At the very least it makes the game needlessly more complicated.....at the worst you risk upsetting a portion of your playerbase.

I'd prefer just being able to bring in out of clan conflict cards via influence and keeping the characters to in clan and unaligned.....which is what it looks like what we'll be getting.

As a Unicorn player, I never had any incentive to use non Unicorn characters. Even my only infantry in the deck was Unicorn. But I did not play Lotus+.

4 minutes ago, Wintersong said:

As a Unicorn player, I never had any incentive to use non Unicorn characters. Even my only infantry in the deck was Unicorn. But I did not play Lotus+.

There were some times when including a personality or two from another clan could be beneficial, though usually just a couple.

For my Mantis deck, I included the Spider guy with a massive Invest cost to do a Melee 5 attack, just in case the opponent had an annoying personality who never came to battles to be sniped.

For my Lion Ancestor and Ashigaru decks, I included Gyushi Kageto to outfit all my summons with cheap swords. He was a bit expensive, being out-of-clan (and even more expensive for the Ashigaru), but once my economy got going, each one was basically giving me a permanent +4 to my military strength every turn (his ability was Open, so you could use it during your opponent's turn, too!)

Daigotsu Hotaku was dumb good.

Actually I find it more weird that you could use some out-of-clan tricks than that you could use some out-of-clan (dynasty) characters. Have a look at this : in fact, you would be able to have an out-of-clan strategy character in your deck, but not an out-of-clan dynasty character in your deck ? And tricks, I feel like they are very and intimately linked to a clan. While characters, well, they can be anywhere helping anyone, theoretically.

Hence why I would not find it illogical, that you could spash out-of-clan dynasty characters in your deck. With either a set restriction : like only one clan for all out-of-clan personnalities ; or only 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards. Or with an impact on the stats of the card : like +1 fate cost to pay for an out-of-clan dynasty character ; or out-of-clan characters don't add their glory to their strenght ; or you don't win honor with out-of-clan characters when they fade out.

1 minute ago, Katsutoshi said:

Actually I find it more weird that you could use some out-of-clan tricks than that you could use some out-of-clan (dynasty) characters. Have a look at this : in fact, you would be able to have an out-of-clan strategy character in your deck, but not an out-of-clan dynasty character in your deck ? And tricks, I feel like they are very and intimately linked to a clan. While characters, well, they can be anywhere helping anyone, theoretically.

Hence why I would not find it illogical, that you could spash out-of-clan dynasty characters in your deck. With either a set restriction : like only one clan for all out-of-clan personnalities ; or only 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards. Or with an impact on the stats of the card : like +1 fate cost to pay for an out-of-clan dynasty character ; or out-of-clan characters don't add their glory to their strenght ; or you don't win honor with out-of-clan characters when they fade out.

To counter your argument: I would point out that you could Learn from your enemy, but don't help them! Working against your clan would be out of theme, where as picking up tricks from your enemy might make sense.

5 minutes ago, Katsutoshi said:

Actually I find it more weird that you could use some out-of-clan tricks than that you could use some out-of-clan (dynasty) characters. Have a look at this : in fact, you would be able to have an out-of-clan strategy character in your deck, but not an out-of-clan dynasty character in your deck ? And tricks, I feel like they are very and intimately linked to a clan. While characters, well, they can be anywhere helping anyone, theoretically.

Hence why I would not find it illogical, that you could spash out-of-clan dynasty characters in your deck. With either a set restriction : like only one clan for all out-of-clan personnalities ; or only 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards. Or with an impact on the stats of the card : like +1 fate cost to pay for an out-of-clan dynasty character ; or out-of-clan characters don't add their glory to their strenght ; or you don't win honor with out-of-clan characters when they fade out.

If that was the case, I think they would have either mixed it with the "influence" for the conflict deck or put another similar value on the stronghold for the dynasty deck.

Having a value for the conflict deck and none for the dynasty deck, with both able to take a limited number of cards from other clans seems illogical and fairly complicated for nothing to me.

3 minutes ago, Mirith said:

To counter your argument: I would point out that you could Learn from your enemy, but don't help them! Working against your clan would be out of theme, where as picking up tricks from your enemy might make sense.

To have out-of-clan characters helping your clan, doesn't make them work against their own clan. That is not true.

For the other part, it's a matter of opinion. Clans are very secretive with their techniques, their teachings. Whereas characters, well you could always find a reason for them to join forces with another clan for a short time.

1 minute ago, KerenRhys said:

If that was the case, I think they would have either mixed it with the "influence" for the conflict deck or put another similar value on the stronghold for the dynasty deck.

Having a value for the conflict deck and none for the dynasty deck, with both able to take a limited number of cards from other clans seems illogical and fairly complicated for nothing to me.

Deckbuilding restrictions do not appear on cards. If the deckbuilding restriction is that you can only have 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards, period, then you would see it nowhere on the cards.

Same for the impact on the cost or strength of the card. If all out-of-clan characters cost 1 more fate to pay from your provinces, it would not appear on the card.

Yes, I agree, it does add some rules and complicate a little bit the game.

But I personally have a hard time seeing L5R without the possibility to mix clan personalities in normal decks...

2 minutes ago, Katsutoshi said:

Deckbuilding restrictions do not appear on cards. If the deckbuilding restriction is that you can only have 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards, period, then you would see it nowhere on the cards.

Same for the impact on the cost or strength of the card. If all out-of-clan characters cost 1 more fate to pay from your provinces, it would not appear on the card.

Yes, I agree, it does add some rules and complicate a little bit the game.

But I personally have a hard time seeing L5R without the possibility to mix clan personalities in normal decks...

So far in building restrictions most definitely appear on the cards. Influence is printed on the stronghold and the conflict cards. We have not seen any form of "loyal" keyword yet on any characters (not that we have seen a lot, nor have we seen clan champions), but it seems like either an oversight or weird design for them to do one thing for conflict and the other for dynasty.

Also, from my experience (Mainly celestial and Emperor), people shied away from splashing in of out of clan, even when AEG started pushing it with the out of clan discounts. Usually the splash was because the affect was super powerful or made the deck work: Daigotsu Hotaku, Hiruma Nikaru, That Bog Hag magistrate, A scorpion courtier in Yasuki dishonor I think.

3 minutes ago, Katsutoshi said:

Deckbuilding restrictions do not appear on cards. If the deckbuilding restriction is that you can only have 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards, period, then you would see it nowhere on the cards.

Same for the impact on the cost or strength of the card. If all out-of-clan characters cost 1 more fate to pay from your provinces, it would not appear on the card.

Yes, I agree, it does add some rules and complicate a little bit the game.

But I personally have a hard time seeing L5R without the possibility to mix clan personalities in normal decks...

The problem I have with this is that it takes away from clan identity. If 10 out clan characters are allowed, using your example, competitive decks will be built around the 10 Best characters, regardless of clan, then each clan would add in stuff to support those characters. To me that undercuts the spirit of the game.

I've personally had enough of the "superfriends" decks In the various card games that have allowed this sort of thing I the past. When I sit down to play I want to have a clan vs clan struggle.....not a "superfriends" mirror match were both played are showing off which clan works best with the top 10 characters.....

12 minutes ago, Mirith said:

So far in building restrictions most definitely appear on the cards. Influence is printed on the stronghold and the conflict cards. We have not seen any form of "loyal" keyword yet on any characters (not that we have seen a lot, nor have we seen clan champions), but it seems like either an oversight or weird design for them to do one thing for conflict and the other for dynasty.

That's because they are elaborate. Influence is a variable you can play with : one card can cost one influence, the other one can cost three. If you set the restriction to 10 cards, you don't need to write it anywhere : it becomes a rulebook rule.

The same is true if all out-of-clan characters cost one more fate -> rulebook rule.

Just now, Katsutoshi said:

That's because they are elaborate. Influence is a variable you can play with : one card can cost one influence, the other one can cost three. If you set the restriction to 10 cards, you don't need to write it anywhere : it becomes a rulebook rule.

It is, but from what I've seen from FFG, they tend to not like these sorts of blanket statements. It tends to be more restrictive, not less, for design space.

Maybe cards with no printed influence are your "loyal" cards. And if it has printed influence, it can be used out of clan for that cost, regardless of your deck. So it might get splashed into dynasty later.

12 minutes ago, Ishi Tonu said:

The problem I have with this is that it takes away from clan identity. If 10 out clan characters are allowed, using your example, competitive decks will be built around the 10 Best characters, regardless of clan, then each clan would add in stuff to support those characters. To me that undercuts the spirit of the game.

I've personally had enough of the "superfriends" decks In the various card games that have allowed this sort of thing I the past. When I sit down to play I want to have a clan vs clan struggle.....not a "superfriends" mirror match were both played are showing off which clan works best with the top 10 characters.....

I can hear that, and I would even say I agree with you.

But if I want to play a Lion/Crane deck because I like both clans, that's also nice to have this possibility.

I believe that they have a lot of tools to balance this. It could be 10 out-of-clan dynasty cards... from the same clan. It would add flavor to the splash. If you add to that the 'malus' the out-of-clan cards would have (+1 fate cost, or no glory bonus etc.), then you can prevent players from abusing it, while making it available for casual play, or for deckbuilding geniuses.

What if influence only affects how much influence worth of cards you can have out at one time, and has nothing to do with deck building at all?

1 minute ago, clanmccracken said:

What if influence only affects how much influence worth of cards you can have out at one time, and has nothing to do with deck building at all?

I guess anything is possible as we just don't know, but it seems highly likely FFG is just going to port ANR's Influence system over to Nu5R.

Just now, Danwarr said:

I guess anything is possible as we just don't know, but it seems highly likely FFG is just going to port ANR's Influence system over to Nu5R.

Why not, what is wrong with it?

Just now, Mirith said:

Why not, what is wrong with it?

Nothing, I think the system works quite well. I was replying to this comment:

Quote

What if influence only affects how much influence worth of cards you can have out at one time, and has nothing to do with deck building at all?

That just seems too fiddly, but who knows.

Just now, Danwarr said:

Nothing, I think the system works quite well. I was replying to this comment:

That just seems too fiddly, but who knows.

I agree with the too fiddly. But A:NR's system is that it is a deckbuilding thing, not an in-play thing, thus some causing me some confusion from your posts.

9 minutes ago, Mirith said:

I agree with the too fiddly. But A:NR's system is that it is a deckbuilding thing, not an in-play thing, thus some causing me some confusion from your posts.

I'm aware. I was just reinforcing that idea.

Someone wrote this:

16 minutes ago, clanmccracken said:

What if influence only affects how much influence worth of cards you can have out at one time, and has nothing to do with deck building at all?

I said (tried to say), "probably not, because ANR doesn't work this way".

Having Influence being a deckbuilding restriction is great and works very well in Netrunner. I wish more games had systems like that.

Actually it would get really too complicated, and work against being more balanced. You would have to manage well both fate and influence, to optimise how many dudes you have out there... Nope, no chance it happens.