I sincerely hope that the new scorpion stronghold lets you play with more than 10 conflict characters.
After the imperial cycle, where nearly every good scorpion character was conflict, that deck restriction is extremely painful.

5 hours ago, Ignithas said:

I honestly think that you misinterpreted the designer interview. When the sentence "If you only knew" was said, I got the feeling that we will see pretty unfair Unicorn cards.

I don't think that couple characters with decent printed abilities and impactful conflict cards will do the trick. Unicorn is at that point too far behind. They probably need powerhouses like Niten Master that can generate a lot of value and ways to protect their cards against hardcontrol decks. Otherwise they will get bullied by either midrange or control decks.

The second paragraph can't be said enough - The Unicorn clan card pool can be basically summed up as somewhere in the range of "Underpowered" to "Unfocused" (The harshest critics say that Unicorn's subpar performance is because their cards are simply bad. While other critics say their cards have no synergy with each other). There is a 3rd point I suppose, that says Unicorn players don't know how to play L5R (ie - There simply isn't a card problem, Unicorn players need to "get good"), but I really don't think that is the case - more on that later.

You could introduce some OP unicorn cards into the environment - but:

a) this does not negate the rest of the bad card pool in the deck - the Unicorn player will still need to play the bad cards to make deck minimum
b-1) if the new "OP Unicorn Cards" are decent but not breaking, then it's still the same problem - then it becomes a case where the Unicorn player needs to see these cards to even have a chance to win - is that really balanced?
b-2) if the new "OP Unicorn Cards" is so good that they win games by themselves, then it will get banned, restricted, or errata'ed, which gets you to the same problem.

The correct answer is to fix the unicorn pool (lets peg it at 10 cards that need upward errata)... but this is not hearthstone (where you can change card text with a program patch). Fantasy Flight will have to literally issue errata on the website - they will more than likely have to reprint the cards affected (at their own cost and no revenue). PR Wise, that would be awesome, but there is playtesting costs/print costs/shipping costs (for these 30 cards packs because they would have to have a playset of each card that needs errata - which I suppose they can save on package, but it's still at a significent costs) that they are going to have to eat if they choose to do that. If the don't correct it now, the next realisitic point they can correct it is if/when they print a 2nd edition of the core set.

FF has already made their money on people buying the cards, regardless of whether or not the player was happy with the cards. It's simple business economics - do they put in significant money for a part of your playerbase to stay and maybe buy future clan/dynasty packs. I really can't see it - because I don't think that Fantasy Flight will issue put in the necessary errata to make cards due to the costs above.

Crab: During a conflict give a strength bonus to a province equal to the number of holdings you control. I would really appreciate a deck style that captures defending the wall.

Crane: Maybe giving the covert keyword to a character during a political conflict...

Unicorn: Give opposing characters a skill penalty (-Mil/-Pol) equal to the number of calvary characters you control. Fear the Horde. And no zero strength!

1 hour ago, K.Rc. said:

The second paragraph can't be said enough - The Unicorn clan card pool can be basically summed up as somewhere in the range of "Underpowered" to "Unfocused" (The harshest critics say that Unicorn's subpar performance is because their cards are simply bad. While other critics say their cards have no synergy with each other). There is a 3rd point I suppose, that says Unicorn players don't know how to play L5R (ie - There simply isn't a card problem, Unicorn players need to "get good"), but I really don't think that is the case - more on that later.

You could introduce some OP unicorn cards into the environment - but:

a) this does not negate the rest of the bad card pool in the deck - the Unicorn player will still need to play the bad cards to make deck minimum
b-1) if the new "OP Unicorn Cards" are decent but not breaking, then it's still the same problem - then it becomes a case where the Unicorn player needs to see these cards to even have a chance to win - is that really balanced?
b-2) if the new "OP Unicorn Cards" is so good that they win games by themselves, then it will get banned, restricted, or errata'ed, which gets you to the same problem.

The correct answer is to fix the unicorn pool (lets peg it at 10 cards that need upward errata)... but this is not hearthstone (where you can change card text with a program patch). Fantasy Flight will have to literally issue errata on the website - they will more than likely have to reprint the cards affected (at their own cost and no revenue). PR Wise, that would be awesome, but there is playtesting costs/print costs/shipping costs (for these 30 cards packs because they would have to have a playset of each card that needs errata - which I suppose they can save on package, but it's still at a significent costs) that they are going to have to eat if they choose to do that. If the don't correct it now, the next realisitic point they can correct it is if/when they print a 2nd edition of the core set.

FF has already made their money on people buying the cards, regardless of whether or not the player was happy with the cards. It's simple business economics - do they put in significant money for a part of your playerbase to stay and maybe buy future clan/dynasty packs. I really can't see it - because I don't think that Fantasy Flight will issue put in the necessary errata to make cards due to the costs above.

A Clan pack has 25 cards, take out 1 for each other clan, you can get 10 dynasty and 9 conflict cards in. That is most of either deck if you play 3 copies. So a single card pack could combind with neutrals and the better existing Unicorn cards make for a strong deck if the new cards where all on curve. You would just have a problem with diversity as many cards would remain unplayable.

Lion: Kitsu stronghold that somehow brings a character from the discart pile to play.

Alternatively, it could generate an ancestor character by discarding a card from hand... A use for the terrible Guidance of the Ancestors.

10 hours ago, Ignithas said:

I don't see how very limited and telegraphed movement is better than giving characters +2/+2 or +2 glory. One of the weaknesses of Unicorn is that they need to expand too many ressources to win conflicts/break provinces and movement does nothing to change that. Giving free combat buffs is simply better.

I personally think that the glory theme makes sense for Phoenix. They can bend the elements to their will, speak with Kami, have huge librarys and host events where they display their powers. It is logical that they are very renowned throughout Rokugan.

I don't think that couple characters with decent printed abilities and impactful conflict cards will do the trick. Unicorn is at that point too far behind. They probably need powerhouses like Niten Master that can generate a lot of value and ways to protect their cards against hardcontrol decks. Otherwise they will get bullied by either midrange or control decks.

If the Phoenix core stronghd makes sense to you then that's great. I still don't see it but whatevs....not a big deal.

I think we've gone back and forth about the Unicorn stronghold before and before we take this topic way off the rails I'll just offer up a a respectful agree to disagree. If you want to continue it in PM I'm game.

I think 'fixing' a clan via stronghold update sets a bad precedent and would actually be doubly bad for unicorn because they would have to start over on their theme. While it doesn't seem like it's got much clarity or synergy right now, it's clearly revolving around movement. The problem is that Unicorn have very little in the way of cards that get bonuses for moving. Ide Trader is a good example of the types of characters Unicorn needs more of. Border Rider, Tadji, Juro, Tetsuo, Favored Mount, stronghold, and Favored Ground are all decent to great movement effects but Unicorn just had no significant way to capitalize on them.

Something along the lines a character with an ability that rewards you for movement, like Trader does, is what they need more of. Errata or a complete redo would only exacerbate the issue.

Gimme something like:

3 fate cost

2 mil, 2 pol, 0 glory

Bushi Cavalry

Reaction: this character gains +1M/+1P after a character moves to a conflict he is participating in. (Unlimited)

Or instead of a stay pump you move an opposing character home that has equal or lower glory than the number of characters in play with Calvary

Or whatever impactful effect you can think of that triggers off movement.

If FFG just starts giving Unicorn great characters that are not tied to their theme then they are just another color of lion/crab and it devalues the core stronghold. If the continue to design with a deliberate purpose and increase the amount of characters with movement and the amount of characters that net you impactful effects because of that movement then eventually the Unicorn will be fine. Right now they are just lacking in the amount of effects that trigger from movement.

.......and crap, I still went off topic. Sorry.

Since Unicorn is currently weighted more heavily with characters that move then an alternate stronghold for them might be something along the lines of:

Action: bow this stronghold to give each of your participating characters with Cavalry a +1M/+1P bonus. Any of your participating characters with Calavary that have moved to this conflict gain +2M/+2P instead

My opinion was so important I felt the need to double post it........

After further consideration I believe the triple post was appropriate.........

Ok quad post is a bit much.........

holy hatamotos batman...........

quintuple post. lol

Anyways back to Strongholds - rather than new focuses, I would rather see a slightly different take on each clan's focuses

Crab: Interrupt: Bow the stronghold: when your opponent wins a conflict, but does not break the province - Do not resolve the ring's effects.

Crane: Your honored characters leaving play give you 2 honor (instead of 1)

Dragon: Action: Bow the stronghold, Discard a card to return one of your attachments to your hand.

Lion: Interrupt: Bow the stronghold: When you declare a conflict, you may use the other stat when calculating strength. The conflict retains it's current type (ie You can use your MIL values in a POL battle and vise versa - no taking advantage of "-" stat characters though, because that's an illegal assignment. Also remember, your opponent's stats doesn't change, though, so you are going to have to face their stronger set of stats if you want to do 2 conflicts)

Phoenix: Well we already know

Scorpion: Your opponent loses 1 honor for each conflict declared against you (either it generates honor losses, or it buys you time, which for a scorpion player means the same thing)

Unicorn: Interrupt: Bow the stronghold: When you declare a conflict, choose an unit, remove the unit from play until the conflict ends (basically it takes one character out of the equation - before saying that this is OP, this bows the stronghold, so it can only be used for 1 conflict, the Unicorn still has to declare attackers first, so the defender still has knowledge what is going on before making decisions - and Unicorn lose the move in ability generated by the strongohold.)

I got one.

11 hours ago, K.Rc. said:

Dragon: Action: Bow the stronghold, Discard a card to return one of your attachments to your hand.

Frankly, I've been just reading the dragon stuff and skimming the rest, had some thoughts on some of the other suggestions, but nothing that felt really important, but this, man this is just bad. This wastes SOOOOOO many resources:

1. the fate cost to play the attachment, plus the card itself.

2. an extra card from hand that I already can't spare 90% of the time.

3. the fate cost to play the attachment again.

4. the opportunity cost of just having a better stronghold.

5. tempo loss due to using actions so many actions to do all that.

Ancestral is a great keyword because it allows good cards to be used more frequently, as well as keeping certain bonuses relevant after the board state changes from turn to turn (plus fun mind games when my opponent KNOWS I'm sitting on three ancestral daisho and all I do is poke with a mendicant). I get that this was an attempt to get a similar concept running, but it was not successful.

Here are a few ideas of how to do that without printing very expensive kindling:

1: Action: bow the stronghold, move an attachment that you control to a different character. (allows lots and lots of fun things, like moving cloud the mind around on opponent's characters, moving attachments from home into a conflict, moving an attachment from someone about to go away to someone with fate, etc. I don't think this is OP because it is only once per turn, but it is certainly powerful)

2: Action: bow the stronghold, play an attachment from the discard pile as if it was in your hand. (this is something that we've been wanting for a while, especially since lion got an attachment that did that in the first place. Has the potential to be crazy strong, possibly OP in some builds, but whatever)

3: Reaction: when an attachment you control leaves play, bow the stronghold, draw a card.

4: Interrupt: when an attachment you control would leave play, bow the stronghold, put it in your hand instead.

5: Reaction: when a character you control with at least one attachment leaves play, bow the stronghold, put one of the attachments into play on a character in your home.

Frankly, I would prefer a stronghold that goes in a direction other than attachments, but if we do continue to go down that rabbit hole, I hope it is more along these lines.

6 hours ago, psychie said:

Frankly, I've been just reading the dragon stuff and skimming the rest, had some thoughts on some of the other suggestions, but nothing that felt really important, but this, man this is just bad. This wastes SOOOOOO many resources:

1. the fate cost to play the attachment, plus the card itself.

2. an extra card from hand that I already can't spare 90% of the time.

3. the fate cost to play the attachment again.

4. the opportunity cost of just having a better stronghold.

5. tempo loss due to using actions so many actions to do all that.

Here's my reasoning:

1) The fate cost is so that you don't gain an card advantage, you are paying for the reallocation, not reallocation+an additional card to shield you from Ring of Earth. It's just the same as a draw/discard mechanic vs just a straight draw

2) See above: If you're attachment heavy - You don't have any less cards "that are used" - your cards are all out on the field rather than in your hand. I find from my expreriene that dragon tend to overplay there attachments, they'll play that one extra attachment if they can rather than holding it back. If your issue is the number of cards coming into your hand, then there are solutions such bidding higher, Agasha swordsmiths ,or splashing Unicorn. See point one - from the way the design goes, card draw is very valuable - there's either restrictions or costs.

6 hours ago, psychie said:

Ancestral is a great keyword because it allows good cards to be used more frequently, as well as keeping certain bonuses relevant after the board state changes from turn to turn (plus fun mind games when my opponent KNOWS I'm sitting on three ancestral daisho and all I do is poke with a mendicant). I get that this was an attempt to get a similar concept running, but it was not successful.

Here are a few ideas of how to do that without printing very expensive kindling:

1: Action: bow the stronghold, move an attachment that you control to a different character. (allows lots and lots of fun things, like moving cloud the mind around on opponent's characters, moving attachments from home into a conflict, moving an attachment from someone about to go away to someone with fate, etc. I don't think this is OP because it is only once per turn, but it is certainly powerful)

2: Action: bow the stronghold, play an attachment from the discard pile as if it was in your hand. (this is something that we've been wanting for a while, especially since lion got an attachment that did that in the first place. Has the potential to be crazy strong, possibly OP in some builds, but whatever)

Ancestral is balanced around the fact that it is reoccurring (and balanced accordingly)

The problem with is is you are now effectively immune to any sort attachment destruction, and all items will now need to be balanced with the mind that they are not short term card attachments (because the game is designed around the fact that personalities will not stay forever) , but now can be long term easy investments because all you do is bounce it to the next guy. The card memory rule makes it impossible to have a "When this item leaves play, it gets removed from game" - this is way OP, and will cause major design problems.

6 hours ago, psychie said:

3: Reaction: when an attachment you control leaves play, bow the stronghold, draw a card.

Maybe, but now all your 0-cost items (which there are 6) now also help thin your deck

6 hours ago, psychie said:

4: Interrupt: when an attachment you control would leave play, bow the stronghold, put it in your hand instead.

it's pretty much your #2 suggestion, it's slightly weaker in that if more than one attachment is destroyed in a turn, you can't save both, but that's it.

6 hours ago, psychie said:

5: Reaction: when a character you control with at least one attachment leaves play, bow the stronghold, put one of the attachments into play on a character in your home.

Could work, I think that you should still have to repay the cost of the item - the a big key to winning L5R is gaining fate advantage, in the right deck you are saving a lot of fate.

6 hours ago, psychie said:

Frankly, I would prefer a stronghold that goes in a direction other than attachments, but if we do continue to go down that rabbit hole, I hope it is more along these lines.

Would be interesting to see what kind of shenanigans you can pull off with Guidance of the Ancestors.......................

But, two "attachment matters" strongholds would likely not be welcome by the majority of Dragon Clan loyalist, at leas not now when they would be the only two options for the clan.

Kyuden Hiruma

React: After a Losing a Battle at a Province but the province was not broken, flip the province facedown. (Unlimited)

You could tap the mysticism aspect of the Dragon with something like "Bow: Look at the top two cards of one of your decks, then put them both on top or bottom in any order." ... Compared to +2/+2 to a guy, it seems a bit weak to me, but I'm sure the numbers could be tweaked. Three cards, or both decks, something to let you make use of a bit more information. Look at each facedown card in your provinces, you may put any of them on the bottom of your deck?

Judging from the Phoenix stronghold I thibk that the Dragon SH does something with Kio cards. If they want to push the mysticism aspect (and the primary theme of dragon), it will probably do something with fate on rings. Another SH that synergieses with attachments would be a mistake imo.

A Unicorn stronghold that you can bow to initiate a 3rd conflict or a 2nd military conflict would be helpful. That way, even though their units are inherently underpowered, at least they could focus on MIL and avoid having to invest in mediocre POL units. This would also synergize with Giajin Customs and I Am Ready.

Or if it gave a free CHARGE regardless of POL or MIL conflicts.

1 hour ago, caseycheesecake said:

A Unicorn stronghold that you can bow to initiate a 3rd conflict or a 2nd military conflict would be helpful. That way, even though their units are inherently underpowered, at least they could focus on MIL and avoid having to invest in mediocre POL units. This would also synergize with Giajin Customs and I Am Ready.

Or if it gave a free CHARGE regardless of POL or MIL conflicts.

Calm down cheesecake, no one wants to see Unicorn so strong again

Too bad...............cuz it's going to happen. The Unicorn core stronghold is just waiting for the right character to abuse.

The Kaiu Wall

+2 Str

10 / 7 / 10

Fortification

Action: During a conflict, bow this stronghold - Give the current Province +X Strength where X is the number of defending Characters.

Dojo of the Swift Blade

+1 Str

12/ 7 / 10

Dojo

Reaction: After honor dials are revealed during a duel, bow this stronghold - Increase your Character's stat by their Glory.

Tomb of the Ikoma

+1 Str

11/ 7 / 10

Tomb

Action: During a Mil conflict, Bow this stringhold and target a Character in your discard pile - Put that Character into play participating in the conflict. After the conflict ends, remove that Character from play.

Shadow Clan Dojo

+1 Str

10 / 7 / 10

Dojo

Reaction: After you play a Character from your hand, bow this stronghold - Your opponent discards a random card and loses 1 Honor.

Battle Maiden Dojo

+1 Str

10/ 7 / 10

Action: During a Mil conflict, bow this stronghold - Your Cavalry Characters do not bow from conflict resolution this conflict.

Question: What are your thoughts on a generic Stronghold that any Clan may use?

Would it work? Would players use it? Would it hold up in comparison to the Strongholds that we have now???

4 hours ago, LordBlunt said:

Question: What are your thoughts on a generic Stronghold that any Clan may use?

Would it work? Would players use it? Would it hold up in comparison to the Strongholds that we have now???

Depends on how it's designed. I've seen both in the old CCG, and other similar attempts in other games and it was rarely some right. The tricky part about doing a generic stronghd is what rules are there for deckbuilding with it.

If it's just a stronghol with a good ability or stat line and nothing changes in deckbuilding rules then any clan is going to use it, if it generates some sort of advantage that the core stronghold does not.

Now if they make some sort of generic "bushi" or "courtier" or scout, commander, shinobi, monk, shugenja, magistrate....etc stronghold that lets you borrow dynasty characters across clans this is where you start to flirt with disaster and you generally handcuff future design.

If done right it can be a fun addition to the game, but, not if it's made to be a serious card for competitive play. In most of my past experiences with other games from the past 25 years, the designers tend to force it and this is generally were a game breaks.

7 hours ago, LordBlunt said:

Question: What are your thoughts on a generic Stronghold that any Clan may use?

Would it work? Would players use it? Would it hold up in comparison to the Strongholds that we have now???

I'd like SH that are tied to themes rather than clans.