8 hours ago, AK_Aramis said:

None of the techniques specify NPC. Not a one. They specify characters, or creatures, or places.

But none of the tehcniques for players are used by Npcs. All npcs have their own and different version of them.
The specification for characters actually can refer to NPC as NPCS are NON player Characters. So indeed the refer to npcs.
They just don´t refer to NPCS only they because depending on the tehcnique something else might be the target of it.
In addtion the building method for Npcs is different and the fact that they don´t get the same techniques as PCS indicates
that it is not intended for players to be target of their own techniques as the enemy types you fight regularly against minions/adversaries
does not have them.
As result that indicates that PVP was not planed as part of the game and in combination with different creation rules for Non player characters
this also shows that it was not a foucs of the game.

No, it shows that the generic sample NPCs minions and adversaries introduced starting on page 190 are designed for quick easy use with rule modifications that make them simpler to run.

Just now, Ultimatecalibur said:

No, I shows that the generic sample NPCs minions and adversaries introduced starting on page 190 are designed for quick easy use with rule modifications that make them simpler to run. These NPCs are not meant for long term play.

And that conclusion you draw from where?
Page 190 say you can make up your own Npcs but does not say ignore the rules that say how to make them.
The thing is the Npc section constists of 2 parts. 1 Part is the minion list for quick reference how some staple enemies look like.
The other part is the tool kit you use to build your own Npcs.
Also adversaries are expspecially emntioned for long term play as they are the Npcs with substential narrative influence.
while minions are intended to be used for the significant bigger part of the npcs without narrative influence.
In addtion to that there is no mention that these Npcs are not intended for long term play.
So what 190 shows is how they want to build the Npcs in the game independent of the lenght you play it.

6 minutes ago, Teveshszat said:

And that conclusion you draw from where?
Page 190 say you can make up your own Npcs but does not say ignore the rules that say how to make them.

You need to do the rereading not me. There are no NPC crafting rules in the Beta.

7 minutes ago, Teveshszat said:

The thing is the Npc section constists of 2 parts. 1 Part is the minion list for quick reference how some staple enemies look like.
The other part is the tool kit you use to build your own Npcs.

Nope.

Page 190 to 191: How to read the minion stat blocks.

Page 191 to 192: How to read the adversary stat blocks.

Page 192 to 193: Advice of using NPCs

Page 193 to 194: How to quickly customize the sample NPC adversaries using 7 templates.

Page 195 to 205: Sample NPC stat blocks.

No NPC creation rules in there.

11 minutes ago, Teveshszat said:

Also adversaries are expspecially emntioned for long term play as they are the Npcs with substential narrative influence.

No explicit long term use stated, just that Adversaries are NPCs with significant narrative influence and generally are a match for one or more PCs in their area of expertise.

All other rule systems in the book are built in such a way that there is no real difference in mechanics between a conflict between PCvNPC, PCvPC or NPCvNPC. This is not 4e D&D were opponents use a completely different rule set compared to PCs.

Heck the sample NPCs having different write up for their techniques than in the technique section is more likely due to the NPCs being made with a slightly different Alpha tech list than what was put in the Beta. The Striking as Fire on Page 197 was likely an older version of the Kata that was changed when the Strike action got the ** critical added to it. Same for the other techniques.

10 minutes ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

You need to do the rereading not me. There are no NPC crafting rules in the Beta.

Nope.

Page 190 to 191: How to read the minion stat blocks.

Page 191 to 192: How to read the adversary stat blocks.

Page 192 to 193: Advice of using NPCs

Page 193 to 194: How to quickly customize the sample NPC adversaries using 7 templates.

Page 195 to 205: Sample NPC stat blocks.

No NPC creation rules in there.

No explicit long term use stated, just that Adversaries are NPCs with significant narrative influence and generally are a match for one or more PCs in their area of expertise.

All other rule systems in the book are built in such a way that there is no real difference in mechanics between a conflict between PCvNPC, PCvPC or NPCvNPC. This is not 4e D&D were opponents use a completely different rule set compared to PCs.

Heck the sample NPCs having different write up for their techniques than in the technique section is more likely due to the NPCs being made with a slightly different Alpha tech list than what was put in the Beta. The Striking as Fire on Page 197 was likely an older version of the Kata that was changed when the Strike action got the ** critical added to it. Same for the other techniques.

Ok first that the Npcs have differenbt technics is explained in Abilities part. It is intendedd that they have these and not a part left over from the alpha version.
Second yes these How to read are explainations but are also guidelines so that you can build you own after you understood how the npcs prsented there work.
Third there is no indication that these rules are not intended for long term use or that they get changed significantly.
All the other rule systems are build with the thought in mind that you use them for PC vs Npc conflicts as that is what the expected player group/ normla player group
will play with the system. Thats why they did not need to make a difference between pve and pvp because it was never intended to be played as pvp rulebook as that is not the
what people are likely to play with the system.
Why is that so bc an rpg designer looks for the most likely to do with the rules and that is playing a game where the 5 guys at the table work together against some
npc factions. Thank Dnds influence for that.
So no it PVP is still not the focus or intended playstyle for the game.

I think we're in beta - and can't say whether the game is supposed to give different rules to the NPC. These may change as they go through the weeks of focus. Right now the attention is still passing through character creation, I expect in the weeks to come what we see in NPC section will change.

The game does have 1 thing that specifically shows the intent to allow pvp - duels. This has always been a very important part of L5R culture, even if it does not occur in every game. The duel rules are written very specifically for pvp, with completely mirrored options on both sides. I wouldn't expect a minion npc to be able to properly duel most samurai but I fully expect an Adversary level npc to possibly kill a character in a duel even if they were just introduced to the story.

I would like the game to continue to develop towards mirrored rules. Techniques can be different, as can opportunity costs - most of these aren't universal anyway. The actual rules for death, crits, commanding or confusing someone, deception ect should be mirrored so that the mechanics are the same whether it is an NPC or PC making the play.

I'm on the fence about the minion vs adversary npc thing anyway... On one hand it is nice to throw up some clearly inferior npc that players can walk all over... but if they can just walk all over them, why am I putting them there in the first place? Unless there is some challenge involved I don't see the point... Unless the challenge is to kill a certain amount of them in a quick enough time frame (before they can refill ranks) to expose an adversary to a potentially lethal attack (like the ps2 Shinobi game had the 1hk tate system for bosses)

I just want them to change the names of techniques if they are going to give NPCs different abilities.

One name, one rule please.

@Teveshszat The difference in techniques is not proof that the NPCs work differently; it's proof they have access to techniques PCs do not. It's worth noting that, in Star Wars, they did away with NPC-versions of talents after the beta for Edge, excepting Adversary.

There is no NPC generation, and no techniques are specifically targeting NPCs nor PCs. Minions do work differently, but only in how they take crits, and in much reduced Resilience and Composure.

Also, check the update...1.0 " p. 190, Minions: Remove the third bullet point (which previously disallowed minion NPCs from receiving passive stance benefits). "

The only mechanical difference left defined is “If an effect calls for an NPC’s school rank, treat its higher conflict rank as its school rank, to a maximum of 6.” Update 1 & 2.

So, the last impediment to using the standard talents with the NPCs is removed

6 minutes ago, AK_Aramis said:

@Teveshszat The difference in techniques is not proof that the NPCs work differently; it's proof they have access to techniques PCs do not. It's worth noting that, in Star Wars, they did away with NPC-versions of talents after the beta for Edge, excepting Adversary.

There is no NPC generation, and no techniques are specifically targeting NPCs nor PCs. Minions do work differently, but only in how they take crits, and in much reduced Resilience and Composure.

Also, check the update...1.0 " p. 190, Minions: Remove the third bullet point (which previously disallowed minion NPCs from receiving passive stance benefits). "

The only mechanical difference left defined is “If an effect calls for an NPC’s school rank, treat its higher conflict rank as its school rank, to a maximum of 6.” Update 1 & 2.

So, the last impediment to using the standard talents with the NPCs is removed

Page 190 ongoing disagrees with you as that are actually Npc creation gudielines.
It shows you how to deal with
abilities
rings
skills
Derived attributes
Advantages/Disadvantages
Demeanors
Void Points
differences between minion and adversaries
conflict ranks
and gives examples for standard enemies.
The mechanical differenc eis in the Skills, in the abilities in the rings etc.
They also don´t get school technqiues and ranks
That makes them different from pcs in creation and playstyle.

Back to air stance: the update that now has it at TN 3 for rank 1-3, and TN 4 for ranks 4+ is still a little too much at rank 4+. This makes using a single NPC big bad much harder for the GM and makes NPC squads a necessity. NPCs will need k4 just to hit and will not be getting the opportunities they need to use their effects. TN 3 from the stance across the board played better. PCs could play it safe and guard to get the higher tn, then drop the guard to strike. Going back to guarding be the main way to up your TN would also help open up more design options down the road for techniques that let you strike while guarding or use a different skill to guard.

Now that minions get stance bonuses, the current buff goes both ways. At rank 4+ the TN to hit NPCs in air stance can also get up to 4. That can be pushing it for some PCs to hit and even those who went straight for air 5 skill 5 in their build will have trouble pulling off the TN to hit and opportunity spend for effects.

The new striking as air is doesn't feel like striking as air and comes across as a solution looking for a problem to solve. The original striking as air and air stance were fine and both played better at higher levels than the current methods.

The new stiking as Air may be nothing like the old one, but I do feel that it squares perfectly with that Ring’s spirit: doing things with grace, precision and creating openings (as in Feint approach). You can do all that by building up guaranteed successes/ opportunities on your next strike (or rhetorical jab). You can transform a failed roll (too few successes to make the TN but some opportunities to spend) into a feint that will give you very fine control on the result of your next action.

Now it does not increase your TN anymore... but it means that the highest TN one will have while being able to attack at the same time is 4, which is actually not too bad at school rank 4. It’s not a big stretch to find an adversary NPC who can keep 5 dice by adding the right template. Against TN 5+, it did not fly, but TN4 is still manageable.

Now the fact to associate TN to be hit with the Air ring does feel like a legacy of previous editions and I wouldn’t be against some change here (e.g. make a roll-less version of the Guard action that only adds 1 to the TN, and that Water stance could use as a bonus action).

Remember that you can increase your TN to be hit indirectly by applying Injured Body Parts (+2 TN), Dazed Condition (+2 TN), and Scar Disadvantages (about -1 success on average). Air is very good about making all of these happen due to Precise Opportunity, which allows you to choose what crit-result target gets.

I think "I try to spend 3 opportunities to daze-crit him, effectively gaining +2TN" is more interesting and healthier for the game that "I spend 3 opportunities on Striking as Air to get +2 TNtobehit vs first attack that targets me".