42 minutes ago, Jennkryst said:

L5R 1-4 May not have been. FFG L5R looks to be a good one, though. And I say this as someone who has a good... half of the 4e books. I played it, but it seemed lacking. I will not repeat the flaws that I encountered, because they have been stated elsewhere, by myself and others.

As for mechanics making 1-4 popular... WHICH ONES? 4e is filled with optional rules on how to make the game your own. Who is to say that your Rokugun is the same as someone else's?

Every Fantasy Flight game I have ever played, I have had fun. Sometimes it was a bewildered fun, as it took time to learn the rules, but always fun. So I will ALWAYS give them the benefit of the doubt.

Im not going to debate FFG track-record on RPG, I happen to dislike most of them. This is my opinion and that is yours and not worth arguing since the two shall never meet.

I was speaking of the core rules of L5R (R&K), and Yes it has optional rules most games do that is not a bad/good thing that just is.

I have all the 1st through 4th books and love the game. Yes it had some rule issues every game does.

I have read through the rule and while they have a few interesting changed that I may use in my 4th ed games if this doesn't pan-out. I don't fined it to be well write (in the mechanical sense). As it stand right now it seems to be a bad hybrid of their narrative dice games and R&K with the intent to sell more dice not to make the best game they can. IMHO I really feel if they found the prefect game system but could not get it to use narrative dice they would drop the system in favor of the Dice.

Hey everyone do you remember when we used to have ceaselessly speculative and demanding [RPG] argument threads over in the L5R LCG section that stretched on for 36 pages?

Yeah, I miss those days, too

There are far better game models they could chase if profit from the dice was their goal.

1. Requiring different dice for different levels of xp, but still requiring large numbers of dice. 5D4's for low levels, 5d20 for the top.

2. Clan Themed standard numerical dice, with various tiers of quality. Replace the 1 with the clan symbol, colour them appropriately, offer them in clear, metal and something with premium in the name. Dice bags from neoprene, Leather right through to chain metal all Clan themed... that would sell like crazy, especially if the LCG required those dice too.

No, profit on dice is not their intention and claiming so without any reasonable explanation won't sit. From what I have heard FFG believe it offers a different play style, unique at the big end of town in the RPG development world. They go out of their way to offer something different knowing full well that a numerical dice system would fail to stand out amongst the crowd.

1 minute ago, Richardbuxton said:

2. Clan Themed standard numerical dice, with various tiers of quality. Replace the 1 with the clan symbol, colour them appropriately, offer them in clear, metal and something with premium in the name. Dice bags from neoprene, Leather right through to chain metal all Clan themed... that would sell like crazy, especially if the LCG required those dice too.

Oh they will have Clan themed dice, I am certain of it... and I'll be suckered into buying appropriate ones for every character I play because I'm stupid like that.

8 minutes ago, Richardbuxton said:

There are far better game models they could chase if profit from the dice was their goal.

Yeah. Like games that you constantly have to buy more of to keep up and stay competitive. Something where it's weirdly beneficial to buy several copies of the same expensive thing. Like a miniatures war game.

Or a card ga-- oh wait .

EDIT: Or any type of game besides an RPG. I literally don't care if special dice are a money grab, because RPGs don't make much money anyway. If that's the price of staying afloat, so be it.

6 minutes ago, Bazakahuna said:

Oh they will have Clan themed dice, I am certain of it... and I'll be suckered into buying appropriate ones for every character I play because I'm stupid like that.

ME TOO.

46 minutes ago, Richardbuxton said:

No, profit on dice is not their intention and claiming so without any reasonable explanation won't sit. From what I have heard FFG believe it offers a different play style, unique at the big end of town in the RPG development world. They go out of their way to offer something different knowing full well that a numerical dice system would fail to stand out amongst the crowd.

I'm going from the fact that a lot of their RPG that were not a third party games add-on have used the custom dice. even there miniature and board games use them. and 90% of the time you have to buy multiple sets to fully play the games. And to my knowledge the only RPG success they have had with them so far is star wars were WHF was a flop. And I'm still not convinced that its success doesn't have more to do with the Star Wars name then the game.

Look I'm going to come right out and say it. After the email basically said this is the game this is what its going to be we just need you to proofread and help us fine tune. There is little to no chances that I will ever buy this game. I'm here to see if they have any good ideas I can uses in 4th ed. So far I've found two. And who knows they may wow me before the release but I doubt it.

55 minutes ago, sidescroller said:

58 minutes ago, Bazakahuna said:

Oh they will have Clan themed dice, I am certain of it... and I'll be suckered into buying appropriate ones for every character I play because I'm stupid like that.

ME TOO.

Perhaps they will have different dice colour sets, but messing with the symbols would be a bad idea.

1 minute ago, tenchi2a said:

I'm going from the fact that a lot of their RPG that were not a third party games add-on have used the custom dice. even there miniature and board games use them. and 90% of the time you have to buy multiple sets to fully play the games. And to my knowledge the only RPG success they have had with them so far is star wars were WHF was a flop. And I'm still not convinced that its success doesn't have more to do with the Star Wars name then the game.

Look I'm going to come right out and say it. After the email basically said this is the game this is what its going to be we just need you to proofread and help us fine tune. There is little to no chances that I will ever buy this game. I'm here to see if they have any good ideas I can uses in 4th ed. So far I've found two. And who knows they may wow me before the release but I doubt it.

Fair enough, there's fists full of games I wouldn't touch with a 10ft pole. The group of players I have really enjoy the FFG mechanics in both WFRP and SW, so I'm really in the opposite camp to you. But with over $1k spent on Star Wars books with only $65 on dice our group certainly made FFG a lot more money at the printers.

From a "I only buy the core book" Stance the dice do seem a bit of a tax, I get that. But as a person who has watched L5R from a distance if I wanted to get into 4e or if FFG had kept d10 R&K then I would e buying a bucket of d10's anyway.

With 4 existing editions FFG's best business strategy is to try and appeal to some existing players whilst trying to draw in people new to the setting as well. Using the d10 system would attract more of the old guard, but would be far less appealing to their existing customers. This attempt at a blend may not be perfect yet but it's got the best chance of using their experience and appealing to enough people.

Sure is polarising though!

4 hours ago, shosuko said:

Did your group actually play through the Outbursts? [...] Or did you skip the system without properly playing through it because it just seemed scary and out of control? I mean, respectfully, did you even give it an honest chance?

Yes.

And I'd like if it people would stop assuming that I didn't give the system a chance before I formed an opinion on it.

Finally besides the custom dice and the strife system. both not the best add -on IMO what is unique about this game.

1. They have made character creation even more constrained.

2. the idea of the different rings for different types of of uses has been in L5R since 1st ed. Like rolling Kenjitsu/Prescription to analyze a samurais stance etc. where the game leaves it to the player and the GM to come up with it.

3. Stances are not new they where in 4th.

4. Courtier battles are not new the rules are in the "Emerald Empire 4th ed"

So essentially they took 4e and added custom dice?

Just now, Richardbuxton said:

So essentially they took 4e and added custom dice?

for the most part.

Just now, Richardbuxton said:

So essentially they took 4e and added custom dice?

Approaches are very big mechanical difference.

Just now, Bazakahuna said:

Approaches are very big mechanical difference.

11 minutes ago, tenchi2a said:

2. the idea of the different rings for different types of of uses has been in L5R since 1st ed. Like rolling Kenjitsu/Prescription to analyze a samurais stance etc. where the game leaves it to the player and the GM to come up with it.

This is more or less Approaches IMHO done right.

No, the things above basically just share a name of the concept and are executed so differently it's kinda unfair to say "this thing was there already". 4th ed Stances and current Stances might share a name, but are fundamentally different.

As for Kinzen and Strife - it would be easier to identify the problems if you shared specific examples, because again, my GMing and play experience draws an entirely picture of the thing. Betweem 6 people I've tried this system on, nobody had any roleplaying or management problems with Strife. But they also like the more involved process of selecting dice results to keep, so maybe its that.

The Approach system in this the new game is haphazard at best and very game able at worst.

1 minute ago, tenchi2a said:

The Approach system in this the new game is haphazard at best and very game able at worst.

You are getting way too predictable...

1 minute ago, WHW said:

No, the things above basically just share a name of the concept and are executed so differently it's kinda unfair to say "this thing was there already". 4th ed Stances and current Stances might share a name, but are fundamentally different.

Not as different in conception as you would think.

1 minute ago, WHW said:

As for Kinzen and Strife - it would be easier to identify the problems if you shared specific examples, because again, my GMing and play experience draws an entirely picture of the thing. Betweem 6 people I've tried this system on, nobody had any roleplaying or management problems with Strife. But they also like the more involved process of selecting dice results to keep, so maybe its that.

The problem here is that myself and all 10 of my players despise what the Strife system is and what its trying to do. So you can't fix that, no matter how hard you try.

Its a minigame that to us serve no other purpose then to add drama when my player can do that fine on their own.

5 minutes ago, Bazakahuna said:

You are getting way too predictable...

Then that would mean that you know why I dislike the current incarnation of the game, and will stop trying to tell me how great it is?

14 minutes ago, tenchi2a said:

Then that would mean that you know why I dislike the current incarnation of the game, and will stop trying to tell me how great it is?

I'm not telling anyone how great it is, I am trying to help people make a game that I can then tell people is great. You are simply banging the 4th Ed drum and offering nothing constructive to the dialogue. If you have nothing constructive why are you still here? You already have a game you clearly enjoy, let other's try to develop a game they can enjoy and then we can all be happy in our respective worlds.

For the record I came into this a total pessimist whose only FFG experience is that I played Star Wars and I came away from that thinking its good for a one-off but not much else. I am by no means an FFG fanboy (but I see a lot of promise in this Beta). But if I sign-up to a Beta test then I think it is only responsible for me to help the developers.

1 minute ago, Bazakahuna said:

I'm not telling anyone how great it is, I am trying to help people make a game that I can then tell people is great. You are simply banging the 4th Ed drum and offering nothing constructive to the dialogue. If you have nothing constructive why are you still here? You already have a game you clearly enjoy, let other's try to develop a game they can enjoy and then we can all be happy in our respective worlds.

I'm not banging the 4th drum, I was responding to another party on the thread. As I have said before I was more then happy to help develop a game for everyone. Till the survey e-mail from FFG made it clear to me that they had no need for my opinions other then to proofread the game and help iron out some mechanics. I have also stated the the reasons I'm still here. There is little to no chances that I will ever buy this game. I'm here to see if they have any good ideas I can uses in 4th ed. So far I've found two. And who knows they may wow me before the release but I doubt it.

1 minute ago, Bazakahuna said:

For the record I came into this a total pessimist whose only FFG experience is that I played Star Wars and I came away from that thinking its good for a one-off but not much else. I am by no means an FFG fanboy. But if I sign-up to a Beta test then I think it is only responsible for me to help the developers.

The thing is to me it doesn't seem like the developers want help. It seem they just need us to proofread the game and help them make minor tweaks. That a errata not a beta.

1 hour ago, WHW said:

As for Kinzen and Strife - it would be easier to identify the problems if you shared specific examples, because again, my GMing and play experience draws an entirely picture of the thing. Betweem 6 people I've tried this system on, nobody had any roleplaying or management problems with Strife. But they also like the more involved process of selecting dice results to keep, so maybe its that.

4

You know, I think the main (personal) problem with Strife is that it is a catering mechanic. Unlike, say, the special dice, it has little to no value for generic use. All it does is to artificially generate samurai drama. You have to need it and want it to really appreciate it. You can't just have it and roll with it because it does not fit any playstyle, approach, and meta (well, it pretty much fits only one combination of these). If you have it all for it, when the stars align at your table, Strife and Outburst works. But, of course, that's just one playstyle, one approach, one meta - for any other, it won't work because it will be not needed and/or wanted.

It is a hit-or-miss, with very specific cases for 'hit', so it is mostly missing.

8 hours ago, Richardbuxton said:

Perhaps they will have different dice colour sets, but messing with the symbols would be a bad idea.

They could put a Clan symbol on the blank face and then every time you rolled one, you'd be able to reflect on the disapproval of your ancestors for your failures.

9 hours ago, tenchi2a said:

I'm going from the fact that a lot of their RPG that were not a third party games add-on have used the custom dice. even there miniature and board games use them. and 90% of the time you have to buy multiple sets to fully play the games. And to my knowledge the only RPG success they have had with them so far is star wars were WHF was a flop. And I'm still not convinced that its success doesn't have more to do with the Star Wars name then the game.

Look I'm going to come right out and say it. After the email basically said this is the game this is what its going to be we just need you to proofread and help us fine tune. There is little to no chances that I will ever buy this game. I'm here to see if they have any good ideas I can uses in 4th ed. So far I've found two. And who knows they may wow me before the release but I doubt it.

I get the complain about FFG and dice for SW. There were a lot of different dice sets, and my friend shared with me how frustrating it was to get enough of them to play. L5R only requires 2 types of dice, and only 5 each should support a table really well... Unless the dice are VERY expensive I don't see L5R being near the scale of SW dice costs.

9 hours ago, Kinzen said:

Yes.

And I'd like if it people would stop assuming that I didn't give the system a chance before I formed an opinion on it.

I don't mean to be rude - but could you provide examples of what actually happened? I was very worried about Strife and Outbursts, but once they actually happened I realized how tame they are. They are also pretty easy to manage, as WMW recommends using glass beads, or tokens is a great idea. There are a lot of ways to drop Strife, but I've just encouraged my players to roll with it the last two sessions we played. We did nothing to drop or manage strife, except to pick dice without Strife when that option presented its self to us. We had 1 Outburst each session and it didn't cause much of a stir either time. It drew in the use of disadvantages, but also mitigated their penalty so we could try new options that our Adversities blocked before.

So I wonder what your experience actually was. You've said you've used it, but you also speak about it as if it is a very taxing system to manage, and that it overrides the desires of the player... I get that it is a bit random in when, and how much Strife you gain but it basically calls out certain disadvantages allowing the player to rp through them.

The biggest concern I have with Strife is whether it scales. I wonder if a high rank character is going to care about Strife at all - and if they don't, then the system needs to be changed so that it scales better.

8 hours ago, tenchi2a said:

Not as different in conception as you would think.

The problem here is that myself and all 10 of my players despise what the Strife system is and what its trying to do. So you can't fix that, no matter how hard you try.

Its a minigame that to us serve no other purpose then to add drama when my player can do that fine on their own.

Have you used the Strife system? How much focus did your players put on removing Strife? Which Outbursts did they trigger? How did they play them out?

I get that your group "despises" the Strife system, but I wonder if that is mostly a preconceived notion of what Strife is about.

7 hours ago, AtoMaki said:

You know, I think the main (personal) problem with Strife is that it is a catering mechanic. Unlike, say, the special dice, it has little to no value for generic use. All it does is to artificially generate samurai drama. You have to need it and want it to really appreciate it. You can't just have it and roll with it because it does not fit any playstyle, approach, and meta (well, it pretty much fits only one combination of these). If you have it all for it, when the stars align at your table, Strife and Outburst works. But, of course, that's just one playstyle, one approach, one meta - for any other, it won't work because it will be not needed and/or wanted.

It is a hit-or-miss, with very specific cases for 'hit', so it is mostly missing.

I think the Strife system does need to be flushed out. It needs better naming conventions so ppl don't think Outburst means your character automatically kills everyone in the scene... but I also think the system is fairly tame, can apply to any scene, and doesn't get in the way of character growth. Really - if your group is a group that typically utilizes their Disadvantages in play then Outburst is basically an extension of that.

I do wonder how well the Strife system scales. I don't know if someone rolling 8k4 or 10k5 is going to deal with any Strife since so many things are fixed to low TN's. Unless the goal of a high level character is to get just a few success and then a lot of opportunities... idk, maybe I should put together a few clan champion npc and see how they fair.

9 hours ago, Kinzen said:

Yes.

And I'd like if it people would stop assuming that I didn't give the system a chance before I formed an opinion on it.

How long has the beta been released?

Yeah I am firmly in the camp you didn't give the system a chance before you formed an opinion on it.