3 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

It might be good enough from a business standpoint (well, not really, because free dice rollers and that conversion table exist), but I feel like it is largely redundant when it comes to mechanics and design.

There would be plenty of people who feel the opposite, so what good are feelings?

4 minutes ago, Blackbird888 said:

There would be plenty of people who feel the opposite, so what good are feelings?

I'm open for counter-arguments .

I like the idea of custom dice - I just don't like dice with blank sides. Nothing sucks like Arkham board game when I roll like 8 dice and only get 1-2 success.

2 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

I'm open for counter-arguments .

Well, you're basing you're thoughts on the game design on feelings, and I'm basing my thoughts on the game design on feelings. I'm not going to change how you feel about it with counter-arguments, and you're not going to change how I feel about it with counter-arguments, so... is there a point? I may do a lot of pointless stuff, but trying to change people's personal opinion is not one of them, unless it involves some kind of criminal activity or imminent death.

Mostly, people decide whether they like something based on an emotional reaction, and then they apply rationale and logic to justify why. Giving you a bunch of reasons why I like the game won't change the fact you don't like it, and vice versa. I'm not saying either of us couldn't be swayed, but is there any value in doing that? It's just a game.

It's different if I was of the opinion that I can fly, and I can prove it by jumping off a bridge right now . I would think you would try to dissuade me, because my opinion and feelings are wrong, and if I jumped I would plummet to my death, and there is plenty of factual evidence to back up your claims. (Here's to hoping you're not a sociopath that enjoys watching people jump off a bridge. Thankfully, this is all hypothetical.)

But I will humor your request: You hold the opinion that narrative dice aren't good (or whatever) because you can achieve the same results with a binary dice resolution. I say you are subjectively wrong, as I am under the opinion that the narrative dice are good, because it is easier and more adaptable than binary dice resolution.

I'm not arguing the dice are better or worse. I'm just saying people shouldn't get so hung up on them. "they're weird! I have my own dice that have stuck with me through thick and thin!" okay cool... use them for another game, or use the handy conversion chart if that's such a big issue. "they cost money! it's a marketing scheme!" considering you can get the pdf and a dice roller free, and there's again a conversion table for standard dice... you're just being picky.

The idea behind the system is that the narrative changes based on results. That's what makes it different, and it may not work for everyone. But getting so hung up on the dice is just so unfair to what the design team has put together imho.

12 minutes ago, Blackbird888 said:

I'm not going to change how you feel about it with counter-arguments

Oh, you will, believe me !

18 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

Oh, you will, believe me !

Well, I could make you feel angrier and insulted, I'm sure. Which is not something either of us want, I imagine.

"Custom dice mechanics enable players to contribute to the unfolding story and decide whether their character succeeds , by how much, and how much it will cost them"

Hope this means the dice decide and not the player decides to succeed. Rest of the article seems to imply a good number of mechanics though.

Personally really don't like super narrative systems.

One thing i like about star wars is it's somewhere in the middle the mechanics matter but has a some narrative style elements as well. Good middle ground.

I think and hope it's players deciding how much to sacrifice in order to succeed. In setting so unforgiving for failure, it would be very interesting approach - assume that players need the ability to defy the lolrandom dice seppuku baits, and instead switch the dramatic question from "will they succeed?" to "what will they lose in order to pursue their duty?"

Dead characters tell no stories, after all.

True, dead characters tell no stories, but a host of stories can be hung around a character's death!

Having never played L5R, this is interesting. Looking forward to it.

I playtested 3rd and 4th edition, was part of the team that wrote 3rd revised. I look forward to this open beta and I hope to be selected. If I end doing so, I'll be sure to test it and see how it feels against the previous editions (I played all 5). But the question about the LCG is a bit limitative... the game isn't out yet.

I was to the understanding that an "open" beta is literally open to anyone who goes to the website and downloads the rules, without any selection process. Am I mistaken?

Could the changed dice system with increased narrative focus be something along the lines of the new 7th Sea rules? That uses a version of Roll and Keep with raises, with a slightly more narrative application of how you 'spend' your raises for a given roll. It could work quite well in combat for L5R, with high-raise manoeuvres using up your opportunities to act and effectively pushing you down the initiative order after using them.

What is more likely, FFG is going with their house system or that they are going to use someone else's?

On 9/27/2017 at 3:30 PM, llamaman88 said:

I'm not arguing the dice are better or worse. I'm just saying people shouldn't get so hung up on them. "they're weird! I have my own dice that have stuck with me through thick and thin!" okay cool... use them for another game, or use the handy conversion chart if that's such a big issue. "they cost money! it's a marketing scheme!" considering you can get the pdf and a dice roller free, and there's again a conversion table for standard dice... you're just being picky.

The idea behind the system is that the narrative changes based on results. That's what makes it different, and it may not work for everyone. But getting so hung up on the dice is just so unfair to what the design team has put together imho.

Because a character with 0 ranks in stealth who rolled a 20, or an engineer who rolled a 1 on a repair check to stop a reactor from exploding have never changed the narrative based on a dice result.

This, to me, goes back to the brilliance of WEG and their chance die. Roll a 1? Something bad happens, even if you succeed! There was always a 1/6 chance of that something bad happening - even if that 'something bad' was nothing more than 'Roll another d6 and subtract that from your final result'.

The 'something bad happens' scale is the ultimate gamemaster narrative excuse. The narrative you wrote involves a the party going to the mountain, but they refuse to go to the mountain? Let them wander until SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS, and then let them know that the only way to fix it is to go to the mountain.

Posted this back on Page 2 but it was just approved by a moderator so I wanted to repost it to get my two cents in.

A couple of thoughts from the announcement article:

Quote

These samurai serve their lords as warriors, courtiers, priests, or monks

So it looks like the standard roles are in place. I kind of like that they’re emphasizing the priestly nature of some samurai. I presume they will use the word shugenja later since they use it in the LCG. I hope they steer away from too much perception as wizards and really focus on the priestly aspect. But that’s just my personal taste, and if they don’t then, hey, whatever.

Quote

Custom dice mechanics enable players to contribute to the unfolding story and decide whether their character succeeds, by how much, and how much it will cost them.

This seems to be the stickiest sentence in the entire article, especially because it enigmatically seems to capture the entirety of the game mechanics without really telling you anything. There is certainly a lot to be said about the difference between “Custom-dice mechanics” and “Custom dice-mechanics”. As it stands, I could seeing going either way. There is certainly precedent for custom made dice to be used in any FFG game. However, they don’t mention the Genesys system or even really hint at it or any of the terms used therein within the article. This leads me to believe that they aren’t going to go the same track with it. Otherwise why would you miss the chance to cross advertise your own product? You could say that they’re afraid it will make people mad but that shows a lot of lack of faith in both Genesys and L5R products so if it were to be Genesys, I would think they would emphasize that rather than hide it.

The idea of deciding whether you succeed and by how much could possibly be a reference to something like the raise wager system, but that’s pretty baseless speculation. What is much more interesting to me is the idea that there may be a cost to your actions and that you can increase that cost to increase your chances of success. Sacrifice of valuable resources in return for the possibility of greater gains seems like a great way to give players control of their choices and make them sweat at the table. As a GM and erstwhile amateur game designer, I love it.

Alternately, they may just be hinting at Void Points or somesuch.

Quote

One of the fundamental choices a player must make during character creation is to select opposing ninjō and giri.

There are a lot (and I mean a LOT) of things wrong with World of Darkness games, but one of the things I really like about them is that there are mechanical things that reflect the actual narrative value of your character built into the system. That is to say, with things like WoD’s Personality archetypes, F&D’s Morality, and things like that there are stats on your sheet that inform your character and your roleplaying which can get you mechanical benefits if you act consistently within the bounds you have set for your character.

Furthermore, by ensuring that they are opposing values of ninjo and giri, FFG has basically said that characters will never get everything they ever want and will always be lacking in complete happiness. They will always have a reason to be somewhere between slightly miffed and completely miserable. This is the essence of samurai drama and a real key to having fun with internal conflict in role playing. If the system is designed well. It seems right on track for portraying the real samurai feel of L5R.

Quote

Whether a samurai chooses happiness or duty in a given moment will have narrative and mechanical consequences

See above, especially as relates to the mechanics of being miserable.

Quote

In every task they undertake, they must choose an elemental approach, and the suitability of one approach over another can give them the edge they need or diminish their chances of succeeding.

This is also cool in that it implies there are different ways you can go about doing things, which is actually present in AEG’s L5R RPG ruleset but not used as often. By the same token, stating that some elements are better suited to some tasks than others discourages people from min maxing into one element all the time and letting it overpower everything they try to accomplish.

Although, I am a little trepidatious of this as well, as it needs to be carefully thought out and applied. If you play FATE or FATE Accelerated you can often see how switching up one stat or Approach for another makes all stats feel very similar and waters down any variety you may have wanted within the character (D&D 4E is also guilty of this in their combat design.) It’s akin to the principle of “When everybody is special, no one is.” That said, I hope that FFG pulls off such a mechanic well.

Quote

The Open Beta will not include every mechanic in the final game

I note this because I think it’s important to say that this will not be the final product. The very point of releasing an early Beta is to get feedback so changes can be made. We as a community should be forgiving of flaws in design at this stage because we’re not seeing the entire thing. Because many of us are connoisseurs of role playing games, and prone to rightful critiques of our media experiences we have a tendency to jump the gun when looking over early presentations. Let’s try to look at what this game COULD be and what it needs rather than what it lacks and then feed that information to the designers so they can consider how to implement something that will be good for the community and good for business.

AND ANOTHER THING!

It seems odd to me that this game would be Genesys based given the release schedule of this beta and the Genesys Core RPG. This Beta PDF releases next week and Genesys comes out...in the next couple months...probably? It would be awkward to release a game supplement (even if it contained the full rules for the game) ahead of the flagship game itself (ESPECIALLY if the supplement contained the full rules.) This makes me think FFG has something else they’ve been stewing for the last while.

When FFG bought the L5R IP they noted that there are a lot of L5R fans working on their development team. So these are people who care about a.) quality products, b.) actual game design, and c.) Legend of the Five Rings. If the release of an L5R RPG was meant to be a quick throw away money grab they could have hijacked any of their other game lines with a veneer of samurai and released it without much playtest (and certainly without an open beta with commentary period) as a way to establish unified lore and make a few bucks. The fact that this is a long time coming is a sign of a work of caring development and quality. I hope that FFG delivers and I think they deserve a chance to wow us.