On 8/26/2018 at 8:11 PM, digdoug said:

So is going from OG Roll and Keep to this trash.

On 8/26/2018 at 8:19 PM, The Grand Falloon said:

Well, there's the door. You're not needed.

1 hour ago, tenchi2a said:

Well, that's no way to promote the game.

If people come to this site and are treated like that, all you are doing is driving more players away from the game.

While he may leave anyway I doubt he doesn't know other players that might be interested, and if they get the idea that the forum is hostile you may lose them before they even try it.

I think The Grand Falloon was being reserved all things considered. If you don't like the game just state that and move on or don'tsay anything at all. Or bring up some valid criticisms so some conversation can take place. But to just come in to throw insults shows no inclination whatsoever to try or understand the game. Seems pretty close minded to me.

If someone has some questions about the game I can be civil. If someone just wants to throw insults then yeah, there's the door.

Everyone I've show this game to (about 20 people at this point) has really had a lot of fun, and all had previous L5R rpg experience. I don't think the whinning that goes on on this forum is a good example of the state of the game by any stretch. 4e is a game I am happy to set on fire and move on with, FFG's edition does all I need it to do, and at the very worst does so with brand new things to be frustrated about instead of the same things I've complained about since 3e and house ruled.

Take it from a Dungeons and Dragons player - the kinds of people who feel the need to barge into conversations to explain why their preferred version of a thing is Correct and the one being discussed is Wrong and Bad? They really aren't good for the community.

I'm very glad the local L5R scene is on board with the new edition, because lemme tell you, the aforementioned is extra unfun in person.

1 hour ago, llamaman88 said:

Everyone I've show this game to (about 20 people at this point) has really had a lot of fun, and all had previous L5R rpg experience. I don't think the whinning that goes on on this forum is a good example of the state of the game by any stretch. 4e is a game I am happy to set on fire and move on with, FFG's edition does all I need it to do, and at the very worst does so with brand new things to be frustrated about instead of the same things I've complained about since 3e and house ruled.

Was not talking about this forum, as if your here you probably have a bias for FFG games. Was talking about more L5R orientated forums. And the Beta bombed with players in my area.

As I said its no skin off my back which way it goes as I have all the 1st-4th edition books, and I'm good with that.

I just thought it was coarse to respond like that. I will admit that I may not have had the whole story, but I said what I had to say.

Just a preemptive thought--I'd appreciate it if this thread stayed on topic... we don't need to have another round of off topic "is this a good game" with the same people making the same points they've made on 189732462589 threads.

But hey, feel free to make (another) "new" thread for that.

The comment about 'naming' opportunities Raises is a fair one. It's not a big deal for me because I've no history in L5R beyond this edition, but I understand the handwringing some people had when - to first impression - it looked like a favourite mechanic for 'over-succeeding for plus plus extra benefits' was being taken away from them.

It reminds me of the debate during the beta which resulted in wounds being renamed to endurance; whilst the mechanic didn't really change, losing all your endurance then taking a largely irrelevant critical effect makes more sense to someone than suffering a shedload of 'wounds'....and then only having a 'flesh wound' effect the next time you're hit.

Comparing it to genesys is a fair one - simply because there is, both in narrative dice and specifically an opportunity-that's-not-success mechanic, a lot of similarity. Plus, whilst you have to try and appeal to previous players, a non-trivial proportion of the potential audience are non-L5R veteran FFG RPG players, to whom Genesys/SWRPG based games are 'normal' and explaining that it's like what you're used to, but not exactly like what you're used to, helps explain why it's a separate game, and not just a sourcebook for genesys.

Personally, I think it's an improvement. As @llamaman88 says, you often have to decide if you're prepared to stick the consequences of passing. Sometimes it's an easy choice, and sometimes the option is taken out of your hands, but the statistical potential is always there for that ludicrous string of exploding successes....

And compared to Genesys, it is a touch simpler to do dice pools. Rather than a fixed number of dice to generate a random number of successes you need to get on other dice, there's just a single difficulty value, but choice comes about because the threat equivalent is nailed to the good results on the positive dice.

3 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

The comment about 'naming' opportunities Raises is a fair one. It's not a big deal for me because I've no history in L5R beyond this edition, but I understand the handwringing some people had when - to first impression - it looked like a favourite mechanic for 'over-succeeding for plus plus extra benefits' was being taken away from them.

Raises weren't a "oversucceeding" - they moved the goalpost. If you didn't declare them beforehand, you don't get them.

EG: Yogo Yoko is attacking an Oni, and needs extra damage to get through the hide.

Old-L5R: Yoko's player declares 1-2 raises, raising the TN from 20 to 30. He'll roll and keep one extra damage die, but will miss completely if he doesn't hit the 30 TN. If he rolls 45, or even a 90, it makes no difference.

L5R5: Yoko's player rolls, then sees if he's hit with enough bonus to hurt the Oni. He's still technically rolling a TN2 task, even tho' it won't do the intended if he doesn't roll at least one extra success. If he fails to get the extra success, he still hits, but the hide soaks it.

Later: Yoko is sneaking into the Daimyō's storeroom.

Old-L5R: he declares 3 raises for stealth; his base TN is a 15, so with three raises, he needs a 30. On anything shy of 30 he fails. Anything over 30 is JUST the same as a 30.

L5R5: He rolls stealth and air, for TN 3. If he gets opportunity, he can raise the difficulty to spot him after the roll, and only the guards would know. If he fails the TN, he's caught before getting close. If he rolls a lot of successes, it's not going to make much difference, but opportunity will, and will increase the difficulty of the guards to spot & intercept.

42 minutes ago, AK_Aramis said:

Old-L5R: Yoko's player declares 1-2 raises, raising the TN from 20 to 30. He'll roll and keep one extra damage die, but will miss completely if he doesn't hit the 30 TN. If he rolls 45, or even a 90, it makes no difference.

L5R5: Yoko's player rolls, then sees if he's hit with enough bonus to hurt the Oni. He's still technically rolling a TN2 task, even tho' it won't do the intended if he doesn't roll at least one extra success. If he fails to get the extra success, he still hits, but the hide soaks it

To be honest, the 'plus bonus successes' damage mechanic is one of my favourite things in SWRPG/L5R/Genesys because it's just so elegant, taking the need for a damage roll out entirely, rewarding a superb attack roll with a narrative "boom, headshot!" equivalent, and meaning that whilst weapons do varying damage, if you're good enough, you can be as lethal with a small fruit-knife as an ill-trained bandit with a double-handed weapon

I really enjoyed Old RnK.

I'm really looking forward to playing with new RnK.

I've played so many different systems anyhow, I see no reason to be upset about learning new dice.

And I'm having trouble editing in @tenchi2a's comment about pre- and post-FFG fans. But my response is:

Yay, new groups mingling! I've been a fan of L5R for about... 15 years? Since the 'Oriental Adventures d20' setting introduced me to it. So I've made one system transition, maybe that's why I'm at peace with the idea of another? But still, I'm really glad to see new fans coming to the setting.

7 hours ago, AK_Aramis said:

L5R5: Yoko's player rolls, then sees if he's hit with enough bonus to hurt the Oni. He's still technically rolling a TN2 task, even tho' it won't do the intended if he doesn't roll at least one extra success. If he fails to get the extra success, he still hits, but the hide soaks it.

Actually, Yoko's player in 5R5 can call for Opportunity effects before making the check and "fail" if there are no Opps in the check. It is like the Akodo Bushi Rank 5 Tech so you can succeed and still "fail".

7 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

To be honest, the 'plus bonus successes' damage mechanic is one of my favourite things in SWRPG/L5R/Genesys because it's just so elegant, taking the need for a damage roll out entirely, rewarding a superb attack roll with a narrative "boom, headshot!" equivalent, and meaning that whilst weapons do varying damage, if you're good enough, you can be as lethal with a small fruit-knife as an ill-trained bandit with a double-handed weapon

We had this in our 4.5 homebrew, and I can tell you that the effect does not necessary translate too well into the current theme of the game.

Well for those who are more interested in the architects of the original game John Wick held a kickstarter that was highly successful for the Khitai expansion for the 7th line which delves into the Eastern Lands.

2 hours ago, splad said:

Well for those who are more interested in the architects of the original game John Wick held a kickstarter that was highly successful for the Khitai expansion for the 7th line which delves into the Eastern Lands.

In the interest of clarity, Khitai as a setting and system is a very different creature than L5R, having more in common with 7th Sea and it's feel of "cinematic heroism" than who L5R approached combat.

In prior editions of L5R, it was very easy for a PC to get badly injured if not killed in combat, where as in 7th Sea (2e especially) it's very difficult to actually have a player-character die, to the point that in 2e the Villain has to directly attack a helpless Hero as their only action in the round and the GM has to spend a plot resource, and even then another PC can intervene to save their helpless comrade.

Also, the rule structure for Khitai is much, much looser than any edition of L5R, again owing to 7S2e's intent of fast/cinematic/narrative action. Task resolution can be summed up at a very high level as "if you can make a good case for a Trait+Skill combination to overcome the task, the GM should allow it, and if you can make a really good case with a really good narrative reason, the GM should give you a bonus to roll."

John Wick is at a rather different point in his gaming career than he was when L5R was first published, and I recall him saying that in hindsight there's a lot of things he'd change about how L5R worked if he were to go back and do it all over again. So folks that go check out 7th Sea: The East/Khitai shouldn't go in expecting "hey, this is gonna be not unlike the L5R game that I loved before FFG took over and destroyed it with their novelty dice!"

6 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

In the interest of clarity, Khitai as a setting and system is a very different creature than L5R, having more in common with 7th Sea and it's feel of "cinematic heroism" than who L5R approached combat.

In prior editions of L5R, it was very easy for a PC to get badly injured if not killed in combat, where as in 7th Sea (2e especially) it's very difficult to actually have a player-character die, to the point that in 2e the Villain has to directly attack a helpless Hero as their only action in the round and the GM has to spend a plot resource, and even then another PC can intervene to save their helpless comrade.

Also, the rule structure for Khitai is much, much looser than any edition of L5R, again owing to 7S2e's intent of fast/cinematic/narrative action. Task resolution can be summed up at a very high level as "if you can make a good case for a Trait+Skill combination to overcome the task, the GM should allow it, and if you can make a really good case with a really good narrative reason, the GM should give you a bonus to roll."

John Wick is at a rather different point in his gaming career than he was when L5R was first published, and I recall him saying that in hindsight there's a lot of things he'd change about how L5R worked if he were to go back and do it all over again. So folks that go check out 7th Sea: The East/Khitai shouldn't go in expecting "hey, this is gonna be not unlike the L5R game that I loved before FFG took over and destroyed it with their novelty dice!"

In fact, I strongly believe that FFG's system is closer to R&K L5R than 7S2E is.

1 hour ago, Tonbo Karasu said:

In fact, I strongly believe that FFG's system is closer to R&K L5R than 7S2E is.

Apart from using d10s, the 7S2e is indeed a very different beast from the classic Roll and Keep, even if there's a few common terms (such as Raises, which means something very different in 7S2e than it does in classic RnK).

Kat Ostrander seemed to have a lot of fun with the pick-up game of 7S2e that I ran for her and some other con folk a couple years back, so apparently I didn't do that awful of a job as the GM, and the session helped her get a better handle on how the system operated. Which admittedly can be quite the hurdle as the game's action economy is quite different from how most RPGs operate.

9 hours ago, Tonbo Karasu said:

In fact, I strongly believe that FFG's system is closer to R&K L5R than 7S2E is.

Way closer. Yep.

7th Sea 2E uses pools of d10s... and counts successes by an unusual mechanic: use 1 or more dice to make a set of 10+ total, to make one success.
For example, fred rolls 7d — a fairly good score — and gets...

the 10 is one; the 3 & 7 make a second, the next 3 & 7 make a third, and the 7 & 9 make a fourth.

Personnaly, i like this RnK with the new divers set. PCs can choose to fail an action in order to (or go not) strife or to use opportunities for the group benefit. Additionnaly, a failure on check Can also be exploited for opportunities or strife. The game transcends the elementary concept success/failure for a more human-like concept with doubts, surprises, seizing opportunities.

11 minutes ago, Azrael40 said:

Personally, i like this RnK with the new divers set. PCs can choose to fail an action in order to (or go not) strife or to use opportunities for the group benefit. Additionally, a failure on check Can also be exploited for opportunities or strife. The game transcends the elementary concept success/failure for a more human-like concept with doubts, surprises, seizing opportunities.

Me too. (FYI, corrected your spelling on two words within the quote - adjectival forms don't normally double the end consonant, and take -ally as a suffix)

My reference edition is L5R 3E - the one I have used the most... but nothing here really is affected by pre-5 editions.

A few comments on old-L5R R&K: More than half of all rolls had no mechanical incentive to keep anything but high. The exceptions: Initiative and Damage, and the occasional performance roll.

• Initiative - it's sometimes important to not go first. Rarely. But a few times.
• Damage - if you're trying to dishonor/capture the opponent, then not killing them is of value. "You're not worth killing" is the deadliest insult one can level at a samurai.
• performance or art - it is a dishonor to totally dust a superior in a contest - but not to make a modest victory. While it's not in the rules, many GM's treat the amount over the TN as a quality indicator. (That's explicitly NOT the way it works in old-L5R RAW.)

Further, all the options were front-loaded on the task roll - while good for many stories, it's not good for many players' styles of play. It's hard, and results in a lot of front-loaded analysis paralysis. How much do I push? What's my expected roll on XkY? What's the unannounced part of the TN (typically from target techniques?

This often results in minimal "cool s***, Maynard" moments, and lots of "D***it, I should have taken more raises!"...

L5R5, by moving to three axis results has tradeoffs on keeps.

• Simple Success vs High Success at cost
• Success vs failure with opportunities
• High Success vs Low Success with opportunities
• Success with strife vs failure without

The range of choices is much more of a rich decision making environment - RDME.

The problem with old-L5R is that the RDME was all before the roll. With new L5R, it's split to both before and after. Ring and Skill before, and the above mentioned success/strife/opportunity decision space, enriched further with various abilities.

Old-5R had about 3 pages, 2 col, of assorted raises to pick from. Too rich, for many, of a RDME.

L5R5 reduces the pre-roll RDME to approach - Ring and Skills - and a few certain action-enabler talents - and makes the keep matter, and limits it to about 1 page of basic opportunity spends, and 6 pages of concise tables for just about all the special abilities - vs some 20+ pages for L5R3...

The RDME is overall less rich, but only so much as to reduce to manageable levels for a wider range of players.

The simpler advantage(distinction/passion)/disadvantage(anxiety/affliction) mechanics also make for RDME choices... and allow groups to flip them as needed for the story and game effects without major mechanical changes. Simpler but richer than in L5R3.

Without having experience of older editions of L5R specifically, I can only agree.

Whilst Roll-and-keep is something specific to L5R, "I voluntarily make the check harder for more bonus effect" is not - it is, for example, the basic mechanic of called shots in 40k RPGs like Dark Heresy (and frankly probably most other RPGs using called shots).

• I far prefer the 'bonus successes = damage bonus' mechanic - it means you can take the damage roll out of the game entirely, meaning that a sword through the guts always hurts and you can't roll a 01 to hit with your chainsword and then two '1's for an embarrassing lack of damage; a 'perfect' to hit roll instantly translates into a mighty blow/called shot/whatever you want to narrate it as but mechanically a butt-load more damage.
• Equally, it avoids the 'I failed the extra difficulty but should have passed if I'd not taken the extra difficulty' situation. Yes, I failed the called shot to hit the joint between your breastplate and cuirass. It's easy to do - being only an inch or so across - but it doesn't really make sense why that means I've missed the rest of you.

Equally, I love EotE/Genesys adding both success and opportunity into the same roll - you can hit-but-jam when firing a burst, or miss-but-pin-the-target-down, which feels instantly like it's making combat more interesting than "I stand at medium range and fire semi-automatic bursts at the enemy until they go away" (my main complaint with Deathwatch - although Only War cured my players of this in a hurry!)

• Putting the 'threat' result on the positive dice as well and disposing of the negative dice, though, is an even better system to me. As @AK_Aramis says, you can be left genuinely trying to decide how much passing the check means to you, and means one check can cover a whole swathe of things you might make separate checks for in a different system.

4 hours ago, AK_Aramis said:

The simpler advantage(distinction/passion)/disadvantage(anxiety/affliction) mechanics also make for RDME choices... and allow groups to flip them as needed for the story and game effects without major mechanical changes.

And to come up with custom advantages and disadvantages, too. Because the mechanic is always the same, unlike a 40k RPG trait, the only difference is how often a given advantages and disadvantages will be triggered in a given campaign setting (which is within the GM's gift to control). As a result, if you want your PC to have a passion for Fine Food, or the advantage of being Light Fingered (good for a shinobi), or whatever niche advantage or disadvantage fits the character you want to play, it's not effort on the GM's part to create it.

And yes, being able to 'flip' them is also very appropriate.

5 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Without having experience of older editions of L5R specifically, I can only agree.

Whilst Roll-and-keep is something specific to L5R, "I voluntarily make the check harder for more bonus effect" is not - it is, for example, the basic mechanic of called shots in 40k RPGs like Dark Heresy (and frankly probably most other RPGs using called shots).

Actually, even R&K isn't unique to L5R. John used it in in 7th sea 1E exactly as in L5R.

A few minor games have used fixed numbers of keep (numbers above 1).

A few major have used roll many keep 1: LUG Trek, Prime Directive 1E, Silhouette (Heavy Gear,Jovian Chronicles, Tribe ?

John's mentioned that 4d6k3 for attributes in AD&D's DMG was part of the inspiration.

L5R was the first major game to use both variable roll by ability (Stat+skill) and variable keep by ability (stat).

And while increased difficulty for specific actions isn't unique to Old-L5R/7th Sea, explicitly making amount over TN on the roll irrelevant is.