1 hour ago, AK_Aramis said:

You have to act within the ring selected for stance. Page 251 LC, § "Step 2: Set Stance", ¶4:

"In addition to determining which ring a character uses for the action they perform in Step 3: Perform Action and for any other checks they make while in that stance, each stance confers a passive benefit during a conflict, described in Table 6-1: Stances ."

Page 28, § "<Opp> as a descriptor" - explicitly limits opp spends to the ring used for the check. § "<opp" as a Narrative Tool" strongly implies same. That table 8–1 is broken down by action type and ring also strongly implies this.

For Beta participants, I cannot find anything explicitly allowing out of Ring spends at double cost... So... I suspect that's gone the way of the dodo.

Still, if one wants to allow it, the GM's permission is all that's actually required, and the double cost is a good guideline for out of ring spends.

double cost out of ring opps are an optional rule from a sidebar in the gm section

Sorry, don't have the rulebook on me but,

Striking as Air, in the Kata section

Can you both keep a dice (use it during your roll) and reserve it using an oportunity? (ex: Keeping a success/opportunity skill dice result and spending the opportunity to reserve that same dice for next turn)

15 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

my reaction was too strong, I unmasked, lost some honor/glory, all cool now

but the book does have lots of unclear/uncertain/broken rules. 

in the case of Crashing Wave, it is intented to work that way, as all other rank 4 kata that work similarly have the same deal. so we just need to assume that at rank 4 you are super sayan and can do all this whether you hit or miss. like "iron in the mountain" proning all the time etc.... and all of them are resisted with a Fitness check.

Fitness is overall really strong in this game. Without it you can't really expect to fight in a weapon skirmish.

No worries.

Good catch with all the ranks 4's being worded the same!

What rules are you finding are unclear/uncertain/broken?

14 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

my reaction was too strong, I unmasked, lost some honor/glory, all cool now

but the book does have lots of unclear/uncertain/broken rules.

in the case of Crashing Wave, it is intented to work that way, as all other rank 4 kata that work similarly have the same deal. so we just need to assume that at rank 4 you are super sayan and can do all this whether you hit or miss. like "iron in the mountain" proning all the time etc.... and all of them are resisted with a Fitness check.

Fitness is overall really strong in this game. Without it you can't really expect to fight in a weapon skirmish.

also, if you want to use the technique, you are giving a roll to the opponent (to resist), and you know what that means ? that he can then use opportunities to do dirty things to you. so maybe you need to consider your choice.

this thing can get bloated very fast...

42 minutes ago, Vutall said:

No worries.

Good catch with all the ranks 4's being worded the same!

What rules are you finding are unclear/uncertain/broken?

so far;

-the school curriculums having sometimes "rank 1 kata group" and also "striking as air"(which is a rank 1 kata) and nowhere it is written that you can only choose each option once, meaning that "striking as air" is a redundancy (that is only one example, many school curriculums have that issue)

-the "wait" action in skirmish is totally broken and abusable written as is. If you ever played with powergamers, you know what would happen, it would be a "wait" fiesta.

-the unconscious condition, that you can use a void point to "awaken" AND defend against the attack doesn't mention if you go back directly to incapacitated condition if your fatigue is still over your endurance (which you should, and thus shouldn't be able to defend against the hit as being incapacitated doesnt allow defending. otherwise you end up in what status? since your fatigue exceed your endurance?)

-the "predict" action in duels is really bad and never a good option. I have my rules for that which I think is alright, but need testing. basically, give a predict action to both duelist during the staredown phase, and make it so that they can predict void too. I feel it improves the "mindgames" a lot.

-in a clash, you can command an opponent from range 0 to 5 to fight a clash with you. if the dude is at range 5, and the clash happens at the end of the turn... is it inconclusive right away because both opponent cannot reach each other? but the guy still have to accept your challenge? do both opponent teleport to each other? how does that work?

-rushing avalanche kata, given to Matsu Berserker and Hiruma Scout at character creation, though both of them don't start with a blunt weapon. (rushing avalanche style should probably be for cumbersome weapons, but i understand the designers didn't want it to be usable with polearms maybe because that would be a bit strong considering they have their own kata) it is still the best fix, or make it "usable with non-polearm cumbersome weapons", but it is still a useless kata for Matsu and Hiruma unless they go out of their way to make use of it.

-some weapons have ridiculous stats; on top of my head; the Zanbato is trash. basically a worst Ono. And it is the most expensive weapon in the book lol. and not ceremonial.. the Bisento is OP because of the one hand feature, plus logically it doesnt make sense, a Bisento is harder to use with one hand than a spear, naginata or trident... which all dont have the option to use with one hand. There is other small fixes needed like the Daikyu bow should probably have the cumbersome trait to make up for it being a better Yumi. And the Ji and Yari should have +1 deadliness (but thats debatable). All in all, the weapon table needs revisions I think.

and i'm not done yet. only had the book for a few days. Though I think it shows potential enough for it to warrant fixing. general fixing pass, and some rules to reduce a bit the bloating on opportunity spending.

3 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

(stuff)

Note that the daikyu is to be used from horseback. No horsey, no shooty.

24 minutes ago, JBento said:

Note that the daikyu is to be used from horseback. No horsey, no shooty.

I don't agree with that. then Shinjo Horsebow is also "designed" for horse, but is probably smaller than a Yumi? it is a rule you can enforce though. I prefer to just add cumbersome to the Daikyu.

though all in all, we can say that it falls into the "unclear or broken if not ruled upon" rule ? and you really nitpicked one of the most little thing in my whole list LOL. what a punk.

We're also really downplaying a lot of the RP implications (and since low Glory, Honor and Status turns into disadvantages, a mechanical implication ultimately as well). A Daikyu has to be custom made to the user, is twice the rarity and cost of a Yumi, and is Wargear, so if you go riding around town anywhere but the Crab, you're probably gonna cause a problem. This isn't a game where you pick the most optimal weapon and go for it (again, unless you're Crab but pragmatism is their hat).

A Zanbato really should be ludicrous I'm not sure there's much historical precedent anybody actually used an anti-cavalry sword (seriously a spear or pike is much easier) but there's definitely a connotation about being a honorable and noble Lion with a giant 2H sword over being a Crab wielding what is little more than a modified peasant tool.

3 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

I don't agree with that. 

Passage says it's meant to be used on horseback like twice. At the very least, a GM should easily interpret that as it being difficult to use otherwise, since you're in a circumstance it wasn't built for. I mean, ****, it's six feet long, a lot of characters probably have trouble drawing it properly since it's taller than they are on foot.

It depends on how seriously you take the item description to influence the gameplay, I guess. Note that by the descriptions, you're not yumiing from horseback.

That leaves the daikyu and the shinjo competing, as such: the shinjo is easier to acquire; the daikyu deals more damage, but has less deadliness; the daikyu has a longer range, but you can fire the shinjo from closer, meaning the advantage here is situational - more cover would favour the shinjo, open expanses with no cover (including structures or wagons or carts or whatever) favour the daikyu.

Seeing as the shinjo is a Unicorn-designed bow, and the Unicorn have better horses (and therefore more mobility), they can afford to let the enemy start closer and just let the superior horsepower (haha) keep them ahead of the competition, or allowing them to dart in and out of cover for hails of arrows.

I think the two horseback bows are pretty balanced, actually.

I can't see a way to justify the Zanbato v Ono, thing, though, unless you count the fact that samurai value the sword over axes, so it might be a case of folk sneering at you for using an axe, I guess.

in Kyudo you can use a daikyu. it is still very usable if you dont move that much. probably used to shoot from forteress walls etc. Dunno, I feel just by giving it cumbersome, all 3 bows becomes quite balanced. but yeah, really, this is a detail... does that mean you guys agree with all my other points on the list?

The curricula are weird that way; the example pretty much says that you can repeat purchases, so there's no reason for the duplication. I don't think there's any salvaging that one on ur end. This applies to the weird kata options as well.

The Wait action REALLY needs to include the caveat that it also has the type of the action you're readying so you can't Water stance the **** out of everything. If that happens, I'm not sure of how many shenanigans you can get up to with it that would make up for not acting earlier. I'll have to play and see.

You never LOSE Incapacitated, so the Void point thing isn't for when you've gone down in a fight (that's the OTHER Void point thing, where you eat a crit to the face to not go Incapacitated in the first place). THIS Void point thing is so you won't get ganked in your sleep and stuff like that.

I haven't read up on Duels, so I won't comment on Predict.

The Clash is inconclusive right away. The participants can choose to extend it or end it. It's very cinematic that way - if they extend, the two warriors stride towards each other in the battlefield as the rest of the fight rages on around them. If they choose to end it, then the battle cuts them off from each other. The 5 range bands aren't all that much because the issuer at least should move 1 range band towards the target if needed (challenging and then fleeing is not honourable, after all), and then they still get turns during the challenge itself, during which they can each move 1 range band for free.

I haven't memorized the book back to front, so I can't necessarily comment on specifics. I do know that FFG sometimes has problems with typos and formatting on tables or short mechanical sections, you see that a lot in the SWRPG. But I also know they're very open to answering questions, and hopefully before too long we can get an errata/FAQ on any obvious errors. Until they, I recommend contacting them directly via Email or something for specific questions they're also pretty good about specifics like that. If you get a response you can even post it here.

Sadly I don't think there's a big deal L5R RPG podcast like Order 66 for Star Wars who will be organizing interviews of the devs for new books, I have had so many minor errors or just unclear writing over the years cleared up by listening to that show.

11 hours ago, UnitOmega said:

We're also really downplaying a lot of the RP implications (and since low Glory, Honor and Status turns into disadvantages, a mechanical implication ultimately as well). A Daikyu has to be custom made to the user, is twice the rarity and cost of a Yumi, and is Wargear, so if you go riding around town anywhere but the Crab, you're probably gonna cause a problem. This isn't a game where you pick the most optimal weapon and go for it (again, unless you're Crab but pragmatism is their hat).

A Zanbato really should be ludicrous I'm not sure there's much historical precedent anybody actually used an anti-cavalry sword (seriously a spear or pike is much easier) but there's definitely a connotation about being a honorable and noble Lion with a giant 2H sword over being a Crab wielding what is little more than a modified peasant tool.

Passage says it's meant to be used on horseback like twice. At the very least, a GM should easily interpret that as it being difficult to use otherwise, since you're in a circumstance it wasn't built for. I mean, ****, it's six feet long, a lot of characters probably have trouble drawing it properly since it's taller than they are on foot.

The dai-kyu is also off-center drawn. It's held about 1.5 to 2 feet up the bow, not midline (3'), in order to clear the horse.

It can be used on foot just fine - archery contests in Japan sometimes do so. It's awkward in combat — the weight is top heavy, and you can't rest it on the horse between shots. It's more tiring than a center-held bow, but training can overcome this. I'm not certain it makes enough to demand a +1 TN.

Further, Japanese Archery is focused upon shooting humans on the battlefield - and haybales while on the gallop - western tournament archery owes far more to hunting game than people. Western battlefield archery is closer, but also, unlike Japan, only practiced now by a tiny minority. Even in recrudescence groups, combat archery is a rare thing - and not very realistic, due to the safety rules. Essentially, Japanese archery is point-shooting, western tournament archery is typically sniping.

i kinda feel that a lot items should get mantis dlc treatment - specific quirks that make them unique.

You can't raise a ring above Void+lowest ring. If Void IS your lowest ring, is the limit 2xVoid, or Void plus your second-lowest ring? I'm leaning towards the first.

17 hours ago, UnitOmega said:

A Zanbato really should be ludicrous I'm not sure there's much historical precedent anybody actually used an anti-cavalry sword (seriously a spear or pike is much easier) but there's definitely a connotation about being a honorable and noble Lion with a giant 2H sword over being a Crab wielding what is little more than a modified peasant tool.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhanmadao

1 hour ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhanmadao

maybe the game could have a weapon quality/tag that says "+1dmg vs silhouette 3 and up" that could be cool for Zanbato and other huge *** weapons. A way to balance them without making them too strong in samurai vs samurai skirmishes.

that gives me an idea here... if I add that tag on some weapons, lets call it "giant-slayer" for now, then i can make the rushing avalanche kata work with only those weapons (as blunt only doesn't really make sense, and cumbersome only makes it a bit too strong with the polearms that already have their own kata)

i like.

probably would give that tag to; tetsubo, ono, zanbato, otsuchi.

and add razor-edged to the zanbato also. it deserves it, otherwise its only a worse ono.

Sorry if this has been asked before elsewhere, but I'm just reading through the Beginner Set and I have to wonder - there's been a couple of mentions of the players voluntarily giving themselves Strife, e.g. if it's a particularly appropriate emotional conflict to the character. I might be missing the point but is there any benefit from doing this?

3 minutes ago, Murdochi said:

Sorry if this has been asked before elsewhere, but I'm just reading through the Beginner Set and I have to wonder - there's been a couple of mentions of the players voluntarily giving themselves Strife, e.g. if it's a particularly appropriate emotional conflict to the character. I might be missing the point but is there any benefit from doing this?

Narratively, obviously. If you want to game the system, if you're already high on strife you might want to get a couple more points so you can unmask at a less dangerous time instead of risking a new scene where it could have worse consequences.

1 hour ago, Murdochi said:

Sorry if this has been asked before elsewhere, but I'm just reading through the Beginner Set and I have to wonder - there's been a couple of mentions of the players voluntarily giving themselves Strife, e.g. if it's a particularly appropriate emotional conflict to the character. I might be missing the point but is there any benefit from doing this?

Mostly it for is roleplay, but Unmasking, which requires being Compromised, can be beneficial.

In regard to strife and unmasking, GMs and players will need to decide ahead of time how often they expect a lose of glory/honor due to unmasking vs the rate at which the characters gain honor/glory. Not every unmasking option is a hit to honor/glory but most are and it can feel cheap taking the one non-loss option most of the time. Likewise it can really be annoying to start taking mechanical penalties for roleplaying your character.

16 minutes ago, jmoschner said:

In regard to strife and unmasking, GMs and players will need to decide ahead of time how often they expect a lose of glory/honor due to unmasking vs the rate at which the characters gain honor/glory. Not every unmasking option is a hit to honor/glory but most are and it can feel cheap taking the one non-loss option most of the time. Likewise it can really be annoying to start taking mechanical penalties for roleplaying your character.

sure, it comes down to how you want to roleplay it, but, in any tense situations, aka "scenes", if you are compromised it is a serious disadvantage.

yeah, you can decide to roll with it, but it is harder. if you have a party of really good buddies, you can roll with water to reduce your strife (hard to achieve when you are compromised) and your friends can roll with earth to reduce yours... or maybe use some techniques. probably they can remove the compromised condition from you with one good earth roll (rolling 2 opps and removing 4 strife from the compromised character for example).

So yeah, unmasking wouldn't really happen often in a tactical party. it comes down to the player to decide to "take the hit" or not.

as a DM, you can nerf the "strife healing" if your players are abusing it... tweak the compromised rule to: to remove the condition, need to reduce the strife to 0 (instead of below composure). That could be an optional rule to make being compromised much more harsh, and force unmasking to happen more often. i also quite like the concept as a high composure character blow a fuse less often, but for longer.

in the current system, you will often end up with; i act and i become compromised, but i have 3 buddies playing with me, one of them will roll with earth and i'll probably be fine. next turn, i do something again and become compromised again...and so on and so on. thats a bit of a iffy gameplay. sure you can narratively nerf it, but mechanically (as i like to do) it is also probably feasible.

5 hours ago, Murdochi said:

Sorry if this has been asked before elsewhere, but I'm just reading through the Beginner Set and I have to wonder - there's been a couple of mentions of the players voluntarily giving themselves Strife, e.g. if it's a particularly appropriate emotional conflict to the character. I might be missing the point but is there any benefit from doing this?

It's a way of telegraphing that the Player wishes to engage that issue. I haven't seen text in the core specifically allowing it, but my reading hasn't been cover to cover yet.

A big question came up in my group: how does Unmasking works with non-stoic samurai? If a samurai expresses their true emotions all the time with little to no limitations imposed, then how can they top it out to Unmask? In fact, how can they even gain Strife?

Similarly, what happens when a character "Unmasks" without actually Unmasking? Say, they fire off something that would be totally an Inappropriate Outburst, but they are not Compromised, so the Unmasking rules cannot take effect. What happens then? Do they clear out their Strife?

Also, what happens if a character uses Buoyant Arrival when they are about to top out their Composure, become Compromised from the Skill Check, then Panicked Flight it away? Buoyant Arrival negates the negative consequences of Panicked Flight completely, so is this a "free" Unmasking?

2 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

A big question came up in my group: how does Unmasking works with non-stoic samurai? If a samurai expresses their true emotions all the time with little to no limitations imposed, then how can they top it out to Unmask? In fact, how can they even gain Strife?

Similarly, what happens when a character "Unmasks" without actually Unmasking? Say, they fire off something that would be totally an Inappropriate Outburst, but they are not Compromised, so the Unmasking rules cannot take effect. What happens then? Do they clear out their Strife?

Also, what happens if a character uses Buoyant Arrival when they are about to top out their Composure, become Compromised from the Skill Check, then Panicked Flight it away? Buoyant Arrival negates the negative consequences of Panicked Flight completely, so is this a "free" Unmasking?

They gain strife through inner conflict. If your samurai expresses their true emotions all the time, you have bigger issues, like having 0 Glory and probably having to have been ordered to commit seppuku already. Non-stoic Samurai is, in short, an oxymoron.

If you aren't Compromised, you can't Unmask. If you're going through events that you FEEL should give you enough Strife to Compromise you, you can just add ad hoc Strife with the GM's permission. If you don't have enough Strife to be Compromised, your Samurai shouldn't be firing off Inappropriate Outbursts.

Here's (a possible) Buoyant Arrival interpretation: you're in an intrigue scene, and you're losing the **** out of it. Your Strife is growing, so you decide to Buoyant Arrival away. Unfortunately, your roll gives you enough Strife to become Compromised. AFTER you become Compromised, you pass the check for Buoyant Arrival and exit the scene with dignity. As soon as you're out the room door, you Unmask and flee the building. You're still screwed, but if you're lucky it won't make it to the ears of the people in the room (which are presumbaly more important than the folks you run past on your way home).