1 hour ago, Tetsuro said:

I'm desperately hoping this is true of the Kolat. As a pseudo-Yakuza they are fine, but some of the aspects of their story (sleeper agents, magic rock cellphones) are some of the dumbest things that existed in the history of L5R, and that's saying something.

The Kolat have always been an ancient conspiracy. Since Shinsei's teachings provided the theological background for their opposition to the rule of the Kami at least.

1 hour ago, Tetsuro said:

I'm desperately hoping this is true of the Kolat. As a pseudo-Yakuza they are fine, but some of the aspects of their story (sleeper agents, magic rock cellphones) are some of the dumbest things that existed in the history of L5R, and that's saying something.

I wonder how many of the Kolat's weirder attributes and magical items comes from the fact that they were originally an order of First Edition D&D Monk assassins in AEG President's John Zinser's home campaign that they added to Rokugan as an extended in-joke with him?

10 hours ago, Jedi samurai said:

but isn't that the point of the Unicorn? They have Mongol influences.

They do have influences. It does not mean that everybody does 100% mongol stuff, 100% of the time. They brought foreign customs with them but they keep being rokugani in essence and were in touch with more cultures than the "mongol" one (despite Moto).

4 minutes ago, Wintersong said:

They do have influences. It does not mean that everybody does 100% mongol stuff, 100% of the time. They brought foreign customs with them but they keep being rokugani in essence and were in touch with more cultures than the "mongol" one (despite Moto).

No, but that was a pretty definitive Mongol trait, and one that would make a lot of sense for them to adapt given their connection to horses.

Show me any personality or a hint of relevance and that will be enough to separate her from Yokatsu.

As for the name, I'll call her Altansarnai. It's not hard to say once you've done it a few times.

On 01/05/2017 at 0:33 PM, RandomJC said:

Bow looks cool to me. Not sure what the fuss is about with something that's meant to look cool, and not be realistic.

But a realistic bow would look cooler.

On 01/05/2017 at 11:24 AM, Jedi samurai said:

well ya, you see that all the time.

I hate this argument. Just because someone is a fantasy world doesn't mean ALL logic is out the window. If Aragorn in LotR fought while holding the pointy end of his sword and someone pointed out it was wrong would you say "by the giant flying eagles are legit"? (implying that its a fantasy world with some fantastic elements, so why can't he fight with his sword upside down?).

Altansarnai is still firing a bow from a horse, if she wanted to fire straight a head or behind or turn to her left she'd have to turn her to maneuver it around her horse's body. The Mongol bow is short so the rider/archer and easily maneuver it around the easily, giving them a much faster and wider firing arc. That is something logically the Unicorn should have/be aware of.

This! I detest the "...but its magic!" argument with a passion. It is nothing but an excuse for *** storytelling and character design.

On 02/05/2017 at 4:37 PM, Tetsuhiko said:

The real reason is artistic license, and that's fine. (...) It could be just as easily be swept under the rug but it's often these little things that create a richer story.

No, the real reason is almost certainly the fact the the illustrator and the person that commissioned the piece do not understand enough about Mongolian archery. And that's fine. But it does not make for a richer story, it just makes people who understand such things to cringe. But a richer story could definitely arise from the authors researching such topics.

I recommend people to look at a few YouTube channels like Scholagladiatoria, Shadversity or Metatron (specially good for this purpose because he talks lot about Japanese warfare and mythology, just be ready for the cringe-worthy jokes).

On 02/05/2017 at 7:43 PM, Kubernes said:

The point is that the samurai character is using a samurai derived bow and style, not a "mongol" one. Kyuba no michi (the way of the horse and bow) is the perfect expression of what a samurai was for part of its existence.

The question of whether or not it is more effective than kyujutsu is for another thread.

This:

On 03/05/2017 at 10:32 AM, Jedi samurai said:

but isn't that the point of the Unicorn? They have Mongol influences.

The Unicorn is defined by their non-rokugani influences. They are superior horsemen not only because of the horses, but also because of their techniques and weapons. Stripping them of those things is making them blander and just making them "The Other, Shittier Lion".

5 minutes ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

The Unicorn is defined by their non-rokugani influences. They are superior horsemen not only because of the horses, but also because of their techniques and weapons. Stripping them of those things is making them blander and just making them "The Other, Shittier Lion".

Look at the aggressive Moto - does he look Japanese?

1 minute ago, Jedi samurai said:

Look at the aggressive Moto - does he look Japanese?

Uhm... ok?

I don't think I understand. I was agreeing with you, that the Unicorn have Mongolian (and other) influences.

28 minutes ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

Uhm... ok?

I don't think I understand. I was agreeing with you, that the Unicorn have Mongolian (and other) influences.

yes I'm agreeing with you and adding to the conversation.

41 minutes ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

But a realistic bow would look cooler.

Meh, different strokes for different folks.

Hm...do we know how exactly the stories/images/etc. are being passed down to us? Should we understand the artwork on the cards and the stories we get to be first-hand accounts? Is it possible that they were, themselves, recorded long after the events took place? Perhaps a painting was commissioned hundreds of years after the fact, and the painter modeled the weaponry and armor after the ones from his era rather than historically accurate ones, as all paintings at the time were done to fit a romantic ideal rather than to be historically accurate?

Just because there's an out-of-universe explanation doesn't mean we can't have an in-universe explanation, too!

1 hour ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

But a realistic bow would look cooler.

The Unicorn is defined by their non-rokugani influences. They are superior horsemen not only because of the horses, but also because of their techniques and weapons. Stripping them of those things is making them blander and just making them "The Other, Shittier Lion".

First point, we would have then to moan about most art of the game for not being real enough (clothing, weaponry, body proportions, poses, some art styles not being precise enough,...). Neverending Story as silly at it may sound. Or we may as well kneel and accept that some art will have something that is off to us. Poeple will be playing the game, not deciding victory over who has more realistic art.

About Unicorn weapons, they do keep and use the daisho. It is not suddenly they switch to scimitars (which they have) because non-rokugani influences. Not everybody used Uma-yari but there they are. The small shields that some used when they arrived Rokugan? Gone. Some may still use them but would be a truly small minority. Unicorn were not "Purple Monogolians", despite changes made to them along their CCG life. And after a couple of centuries in Rokugan, even less of "Purple Mongolians". At least old-school Unicorn. There are influences, for some bigger than others, but at the end it is a matter of the individual, her inheritance (my grandfather's scimitar) and interaction with non Unicorn rokugani.

That being said, would make more sense a smaller bow? Maybe. But I will have to point at my first paragraph. And then point out that if art is the biggest issue with this game, I will be more than happy. Not that skin tight kimonos, for example, make me happy.

3 hours ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

No, the real reason is almost certainly the fact the the illustrator and the person that commissioned the piece do not understand enough about Mongolian archery. And that's fine. But it does not make for a richer story, it just makes people who understand such things to cringe. But a richer story could definitely arise from the authors researching such topics.

Chain quoting often leaves critical information and nuance, I apologise.

I totally agree with you. What I meant is taking these mistakes and finding a plausible explanation for them often ends up with à richer story. (Although you can also end up with voodoo sharks, so thread carefully...check tvtropes for details).