All of the devs right now...

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, this was not going to happen. Keeping the 1d0 system would have been nice, but John Wick has just started the kick starter of Khitai for 7th sea, which is pretty much his new version of the Fear East , to be followed up with Japan (Fuso), India (Agnivarsa), And China (Han) books. So having to very similar systems competing with each other wasn't going to fly

42 minutes ago, TheWanderingJewels said:

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, this was not going to happen. Keeping the 1d0 system would have been nice, but John Wick has just started the kick starter of Khitai for 7th sea, which is pretty much his new version of the Fear East , to be followed up with Japan (Fuso), India (Agnivarsa), And China (Han) books. So having to very similar systems competing with each other wasn't going to fly

I promise you FFG doesn't care about Wick's kickstarter. They completely own the L5R license, they own R&K. They've been working on this for a lot longer than his Kickstarter was announced.

I do agree it's a bit baffling they'd forsake the old system of dice when this game is at least half old guard fans, but it doesn't look bad.

I'm curious why they didn't make it D6 and D10. Would have been a bit easier to swallow, at least to me.

2 minutes ago, Isawa Letomo said:

I'm curious why they didn't make it D6 and D10. Would have been a bit easier to swallow, at least to me.

I would assume they tried it and the probabilities didn't work. The chance to Explode would be different between them, so would the chance of blank. Those two things would probably be enough to make it wonky.

Could be, though there were several duplicates. Still, it would have been a nice touch.

I actually enjoy that this game now uses proper platonic bodies.

On ‎04‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 11:45 PM, Bayushi Koba said:

I have read it, and I actually do not hate the idea behind it. But D10s and the R&K have been literally the foundation upon which the entire system was built, since the 1st edition.

It's like rebuilding D&D with GURP's 3d6s system.

D&D, AD&D, AD&D 2nd Edition, D&D 3.0(5), D&D 4th Edition, D&D 5th Edition... most of which have seen massive re-workings, none more so than AD&D 2nd Edition to 3.0 (which is probably their most successful system if you look at the games it spawned too, like Path/Starfinder). Your fear of change and your desire to stick to a mechanic that hasn't been altered since first edition is kind of uninspired.

I'm not saying it's great as I've not tested it (even though I am pretty high on the idea), but to give it a cursory scan and immediately think "No D10???" like it's the end of the world, really? And Your only reason to keep it being: it's always been like that. Thankfully not everything thinks like that as frankly I'd hate my commute if I did it on horseback.

2 hours ago, Bazakahuna said:

D&D, AD&D, AD&D 2nd Edition, D&D 3.0(5), D&D 4th Edition, D&D 5th Edition... most of which have seen massive re-workings, none more so than AD&D 2nd Edition to 3.0 (which is probably their most successful system if you look at the games it spawned too, like Path/Starfinder).

Let me just ask you one question: what kind of dice all those games use(d)?

The problem isn't that the system changed. I was actually hoping for massive changes in that regard. But the dice changing is a deal-breaker for me and many other people.

And this isn't a binary thing: you can change the system massively without changing the dice used, as you yourself demonstrated. Just compare D&D 4th with AD&D, for example. Or 5th with 3.5.

1 hour ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

Let me just ask you one question: what kind of dice all those games use(d)?

The problem isn't that the system changed. I was actually hoping for massive changes in that regard. But the dice changing is a deal-breaker for me and many other people.

And this isn't a binary thing: you can change the system massively without changing the dice used, as you yourself demonstrated. Just compare D&D 4th with AD&D, for example. Or 5th with 3.5.

Let me ask you a question; have you tried any of these systems with the narrative dice? Because I've run quite a bit of Star Wars, and I genuinely feel that the dice add a lot to the experience. I have run every Star Wars RPG since d6, and never felt that any of them really captured the cinematic feel of Star Wars, until the narrative dice came into play.

Also, insert general arguments about how the dice having symbols instead of numbers and the ability to use normal gaming dice simply by referencing a chart, etc...

I'm not saying these games are perfect. Star Wars is horrifically unbalanced and turns into a mess after a relatively small amount of XP has been doled out, and the game can really bog down with the mechanics the way they are, but I am saying that the dice themselves really aren't the core of those problems.

If you don't like the new system, cool, I'm very okay with that. I tried D&D 4, ran a Campaign with it for several months, hated it with a fiery passion, and moved on to something else. That's okay. No one thing is beloved by everyone. I just think that letting the dice themselves be the barrier between you and a potentially amazing experience is a real shame.

20 hours ago, Mirumoto Saito said:

Let me just ask you one question: what kind of dice all those games use(d)?

The problem isn't that the system changed. I was actually hoping for massive changes in that regard. But the dice changing is a deal-breaker for me and many other people.

And this isn't a binary thing: you can change the system massively without changing the dice used, as you yourself demonstrated. Just compare D&D 4th with AD&D, for example. Or 5th with 3.5.

I find it quaint how people think numbers are so massively different to symbols when all they actually are is just symbols. This isn't like they gone from dice to a coin toss, or to rock/scissor/paper, they taken a dice and changed one symbol to another.

This is especially true of games that have a fixed TN per dice (like nWoD or Shadowrun 4th and above), as ultimately you have either pass/fail (two required symbols), yet if you got rid of numbers and put symbols on the dice that would literally make zero mechanical difference, I bet people would still complain though.

On 10/5/2017 at 10:25 AM, Radon Antila said:

They did that with Star Wars too, and they still managed to sell enough custom dice sets that, last year, they and their largest brick-and-mortar retailers actually ran out of dice to sell.

Star Wars is a little different though.

No one buys Lego L5R sets or L5R diapers for their babies.

2 hours ago, GhostSanta said:

Star Wars is a little different though.

No one buys Lego L5R sets or L5R diapers for their babies.

People bought clan coloured d10 under AEG, an it seems like one won't need too many of the dice for L5R (which I could imagine also will come at one point in clan colours here too).

36 minutes ago, Drudenfusz said:

People bought clan coloured d10 under AEG, an it seems like one won't need too many of the dice for L5R (which I could imagine also will come at one point in clan colours here too).

That's true. In this version you'd need what, 5D6 and 5D12 for advanced characters? I haven't seen a stat-cap in the book yet.

3 hours ago, GhostSanta said:

That's true. In this version you'd need what, 5D6 and 5D12 for advanced characters? I haven't seen a stat-cap in the book yet.

In the first chapter it indicates 6 would be beyond most humans, so 5/5 seems the realistic max.

The benefit with non numerical dice is having a quick way to resolve more than two results(pass/fail, 3 if you include exploding options as different) on a single die, in this case it allows the D6 to have 6 different results without needing some kind of conversion table:

1: No result

2: Opportunity

3: Success

4: Opportunity and Strife

5: Success and Strife

6: Exploding Success and Strife

Imagine having to consult or remember that table for every single die you roll!

The other way to do it would be having 3 different colours of d6 to roll at the same time, you can keep a single blue or green for every Ring. For every Blue or green kept you must keep a Red

Green d6

1-3: no result, 4-5: Success, 6 exploding.

Blue d6

1-3: no result, 4-6: Opportunity (changed probabilities for simplicity)

Red d6

1-3: no result, 4-6 Strife

Then finally you get to the option of not keeping all the fiddly bits with Opportunity and Strife... then you may as well go back to traditional d10 R&K. If FFG kept the original numerical system many more players would be on here screaming that FFG where just " making a money grab " and " we already have 4 editions of this " with a bit of " why did they reboot? " and some " they should just be continuing 4th ed "

14 minutes ago, Richardbuxton said:

Then finally you get to the option of not keeping all the fiddly bits with Opportunity and Strife... then you may as well go back to traditional d10 R&K. If FFG kept the original numerical system many more players would be on here screaming that FFG where just " making a money grab " and " we already have 4 editions of this " with a bit of " why did they reboot? " and some " they should just be continuing 4th ed "

Your coloured die system actually seems way more interesting to me than symbols.

To be honest, I (as an old player) expected the 10k10 d10 system, but I was super eager to find out what they were changing. Maybe bring some more game balance, interesting quests or scenarios, I don't know really.
I didn't expect... What we've been given. The more I read of the rules, the more that this rules system seems like a better fit for a video game (much like most DnD, which I don't enjoy for that exact reason.) There seems to be a LOT to keep track of for every turn and for every roll. When you add a new and bizarre dice system on top of that, I find myself struggling to keep up / stay interested despite badly wanting to.

Edit: Really, generally when something changes or is proposed for a change, I ask myself "What do these changes improve?" If the answer is Nothing then I have to ask why the changes are being made, or resist the changes. I understand that FFG have acquired new IP, but man, L5r 4th ed is VERY close to perfection for me. Sure the history got really muddy by following the card game, but you can overlook it. The game system very much works in a streamlined way without getting bogged down in charts, tables, rule mechanics and various other things that can slow down a game.
I keep running it through in my head. A simple combat in this edition seems as though it will take A VERY LONG TIME - something that is anathema to all of my gaming groups.

29 minutes ago, GhostSanta said:

Edit: Really, generally when something changes or is proposed for a change, I ask myself "What do these changes improve?" If the answer is Nothing then I have to ask why the changes are being made, or resist the changes. I understand that FFG have acquired new IP, but man, L5r 4th ed is VERY close to perfection for me. Sure the history got really muddy by following the card game, but you can overlook it. The game system very much works in a streamlined way without getting bogged down in charts, tables, rule mechanics and various other things that can slow down a game.
I keep running it through in my head. A simple combat in this edition seems as though it will take A VERY LONG TIME - something that is anathema to all of my gaming groups.

This is kind of my point. FFG couldn't use the original d10 system because 4th ed is so good. They could only step sideways from there, or go backwards.

My 3 die system is essentially the exact same as their one die system, theirs is just much more concise and faster to interpret.

Looking more and more at this system I think it's speed at the table will be surprising. The difficulty is, as you mentioned, remembering all the complex rules to be implemented. It's definitely a system that will take multiple sessions to get anywhere near the intended play style. But with a GM happy to fly by the seat of their pants it should flow well.

9 hours ago, GhostSanta said:

Star Wars is a little different though.

No one buys Lego L5R sets or L5R diapers for their babies.

If there was L5R nappies, I'd totally buy them for my 2yo.

heck I would even start planning a third child to get these nappies as soon as toddler stops wearing them ?

Star Wars is big in an individual IP sense, but I would argue Samurai as a genre is far bigger. The potential to appeal to other cultures and fans should be fairly high.

Not sure how great 4e really is. Coming back to it after years of newer games... I feel the need to house rule nearly every aspect of the game. Social mechanics hardly exist beyond contested rolls, which are absurdly imbalanced when you can explode 6k3 into the 40s. Why would you ever raise, the other core concept of the game, in a contested roll when statistics say you should win, but practice says your opponent will explode several times and you won't roll average. The skill tree and masteries are a mess, especially the like 40 Lore skills. Which, the average samurai should have more than a few of being as they're taught a ton of things about their culture besides how to katana people good. Honor, Status and Glory don't do anything really, and are more of a nuisance for the gm to track than anything else. Simple attack actions shouldn't be an entire rank of a school, and getting them at 3 instead of 4 means so freaking much more than it should. Range bands are the superior measurement of movement, seriously I don't want to keep a mental grid of where everyone is at in 5 foot steps, but if I don't I'm screwing with full attack and the classes that get movement bonuses. Shugenja are absurd, so are monks and their silly grappling rules.

I'm not saying the beta has fixed all or any of these issues (I'm not done reading and haven't even come close to playing), I'm just saying that 4e's age is showing for me and I'm all for a breath of fresh mechanics blown into a setting I have loved for over half my life.

Are they using the Narrative Dice System with this Game?

16 hours ago, llamaman88 said:

Not sure how great 4e really is. Coming back to it after years of newer games... I feel the need to house rule nearly every aspect of the game. Social mechanics hardly exist beyond contested rolls, which are absurdly imbalanced when you can explode 6k3 into the 40s. Why would you ever raise, the other core concept of the game, in a contested roll when statistics say you should win, but practice says your opponent will explode several times and you won't roll average. The skill tree and masteries are a mess, especially the like 40 Lore skills. Which, the average samurai should have more than a few of being as they're taught a ton of things about their culture besides how to katana people good. Honor, Status and Glory don't do anything really, and are more of a nuisance for the gm to track than anything else. Simple attack actions shouldn't be an entire rank of a school, and getting them at 3 instead of 4 means so freaking much more than it should. Range bands are the superior measurement of movement, seriously I don't want to keep a mental grid of where everyone is at in 5 foot steps, but if I don't I'm screwing with full attack and the classes that get movement bonuses. Shugenja are absurd, so are monks and their silly grappling rules.

I'm not saying the beta has fixed all or any of these issues (I'm not done reading and haven't even come close to playing), I'm just saying that 4e's age is showing for me and I'm all for a breath of fresh mechanics blown into a setting I have loved for over half my life.

If people were being honest, every previous edition of L5R was an absolute mess, but this always happens when new editions of anything come out. The Edition Warriors are determined to hate the new thing.

On 07/10/2017 at 11:03 PM, Bazakahuna said:

This is especially true of games that have a fixed TN per dice (like nWoD or Shadowrun 4th and above), as ultimately you have either pass/fail (two required symbols), yet if you got rid of numbers and put symbols on the dice that would literally make zero mechanical difference, I bet people would still complain though.

Last time I played Shadowrun, the GM got everyone in the group to buy a cube of GW d6s and then colour the pips red on 5-6 and black for the 1. For any rolls, we just counted the colours and ignored the actual numbers.

On 06/10/2017 at 5:26 PM, Isawa Letomo said:

I'm curious why they didn't make it D6 and D10. Would have been a bit easier to swallow, at least to me.

d12s have more real estate to put symbols on. SW uses d6, d8 and d12. Each has more real estate than a "conventional" d10 to put symbols you can read from across the table.

On 10/7/2017 at 7:33 AM, Bazakahuna said:

This is especially true of games that have a fixed TN per dice (like nWoD or Shadowrun 4th and above), as ultimately you have either pass/fail (two required symbols), yet if you got rid of numbers and put symbols on the dice that would literally make zero mechanical difference, I bet people would still complain though.

I agree. I think it comes down to buying a custom dice set (or two) that can only be use for one type of game instead just using generic dice. If the new L5R RPG turned into a hit resolution system (Shadowrun, NWoD, etc) instead of a binary resolution system (D20, old R&K, etc) while still using generic d10s..., I think folks might be more on board with the change IMHO.