Eventually certain decks will get 'pet' names to describe them. It could be something as simply based around a mechanic used, certain combination of cards, or a typical, generic strategy. Slang or misc. terms also fit often into deck archetypes.
I do still find value in using older, more commonly known (to me at least) archetypes. I do still like to look at how decks will function with the basic three or four types: aggro, control, combo, and midrange.
9 hours ago, LordBlunt said:Ummmmmmm, I checked with Sho 'Nuff; his Glory isn't high enough.
I was torn on that. On one hand, someone as larger-than-life as Sho'Nuff should have 3 or 4 Glory. On the other hand, would he really care much if he is 'Honored' or 'Dishonored'? Once I decided to make him Scorpion, I decided to just go the middle of the road route.
20 hours ago, WHW said:These things come and go organically. I don't think that "invented" terms will stick.
If the internet has taught me anything is that nerds like to raise their nerd cred by coining terms for deck archetypes. It's like podcast and blogs put more weight on a cute name than proving the strat actually works 
"I came up with a new deck, I call it X"
"Slow down a bit dude, does it work?"
"Dunno, haven't played it"
Suffice it to say I'm with the let-things-happen-organically camp
9 hours ago, Ide Yoshiya said:Who in the ninety names of **** calls it that? ?
Shadowfist players.
(We did exist at one point, honest.)
5 hours ago, El_Ganso said:If the internet has taught me anything is that nerds like to raise their nerd cred by coining terms for deck archetypes. It's like podcast and blogs put more weight on a cute name than proving the strat actually works
"I came up with a new deck, I call it X"
"Slow down a bit dude, does it work?"
"Dunno, haven't played it"
Suffice it to say I'm with the let-things-happen-organically camp
Well, I am sure you can learn many more things from the internet. You could learn about people expressing their disagreement with an idea simply by discrediting the person who expressed the idea. There is a lot of that in the internet, too.
Definitely, I don´t agree with many other reasons that have been expressed for not supporting this commitment. For example, many say that this is decided “organically”. It sounds like Richard Garlfield himself appearing in an episode of BBT and expressing his will on how this archetype should be called…
I may be wrong, but I consider that if we begin calling a deck by a name in these and the other forums, it will be an organic decision as well…
BUT
(and I subscribe the words from Bejen Stark on what comes to the word BUT)
It is clear from the thread reception that there is no interest on this, or that there is more interest on this not happening than there is in it happening, and that is a true fact.
So definitely, with no hard feelings, I yield.
Bow.
Backwards.
Bow.
Before you yield, at least consider:
One Hitomi Wonder
14 minutes ago, profparm said:Before you yield, at least consider:
One Hitomi Wonder
Aside from the whole 'people will end up pronouncing it HIT-omee, and I had enough of that with all of the people saying Die-GOT-soo', I love it.
I'm surprised Benkei hasn't been suggested as a possible name yet.
Personally I support the notion of reinforcing L5R's identity through creation of a bunch of terms like these, as long as it's not taken too far.
Well, as far as I can remember old5R had most of its archetype named after keywords really, like scout mantis or crab heroes. Some of them where base on the deck composition like all star unicorn or faceless spirit based on the main victory focus like honor/dishonor bomb. Sometimes you knew what the archetype was gonna be just looking at the fortress, so there was no need to named (looking at you, Shiro Kitsuki).
I just don't remember any special name coming from other card games at all. Maybe that what would happen once the game is released, the traits could just give you the tool to name the archetypes.
I think in naming archetypes there are always a few hurdles.
1. There are a lot of card games and people don't reinvent the wheel. Look at naming conventions that came from Magic in to Hearthstone. Miracle, burn, aggro, control. There is no reason why these need a new name.
2. Cards lend themselves to giving names to deck archetypes and once the meta grows we can define them more. Hearthstone has Priest Dragon Control, and Handlock as well as Renolock and Quest Rogue and Pirate Warrior. These come from the cards that make up the deck. They will develop naturally as people define new decks. Old5R thrived off of traits, so Kensai Spider, Dishonor Scorpion, Economy Mantis, Berserker Crab, Tactician Lion, Honor Duelist Crane, etc.
3. There will be new archetypes as things that are different from other card games evolve. In Arkham Horror, no investigator plays like a magic deck, so we have to call them by their investigator name, but the investigator really defines what the deck will look like. We will have stuff like this. Dishonor/honor, bidding, and all sorts of unique mechanics will force us to define decks that are outside the norm.
