1 hour ago, Tonbo Karasu said:

Also, note that the opportunity can only target people within range 2 of the initial target, which isn't going to be many, unless the enemy are in a close formation.

This is only a problem if you are without allies too. Otherwise, you can target an ally, deliberately miss, and activate the technique on the enemy anyway. Also, it is worth noting that Pelting Hail works on any Martial Arts (Ranged) check, including ones that are not used to attack at all. Say, you can Strife characters while identifying a bow (happened at my table) or looking for a sniping position.

1 hour ago, AtoMaki said:

This is only a problem if you are without allies too. Otherwise, you can target an ally, deliberately miss, and activate the technique on the enemy anyway. Also, it is worth noting that Pelting Hail works on any Martial Arts (Ranged) check, including ones that are not used to attack at all. Say, you can Strife characters while identifying a bow (happened at my table) or looking for a sniping position.

"Kata can be used in duels and skirmishes, and in other types of conflicts as common sense and the GM's discretion dictate." If your GM allowed it to be used while identifying a bow, that is their discretion, but I wouldn't allow it. Just like I wouldn't allow somebody to use Crashing Wave Style to make someone resist Bleeding while they were identifying a sword.

I'll nominate Armor Of Radiance .

When a character at range 0 - 1 of the wearer begins his turn, he suffers Burning and Dazed conditions .

So I move next to you, and you catch fire. Not sure how to defend against this.

3 hours ago, welldressedgent said:

I'll nominate Armor Of Radiance .

Yes, that is a powerful one, as it automatically does its effects on subsequent rounds.

On 3/28/2020 at 9:08 PM, lologrelol said:

5. What are things I may need to fix before going in

Welcome to L5R!

I'm sure this is late, but you might need to fix range bands. Because they just don't work 😂 Every explanation of "functional" range bands I've seen is "oh, we just use it as a general guideline"--some rules *generate* specific range band information, and then other parts of the rules *rely* on range band information, but the game doesn't know how to remember range band information between its creation and its use.

6 minutes ago, sidescroller said:

I'm sure this is late, but you might need to fix range bands. Because they just don't work 😂 Every explanation of "functional" range bands I've seen is "oh, we just use it as a general guideline"--some rules *generate* specific range band information, and then other parts of the rules *rely* on range band information, but the game doesn't know how to remember range band information between its creation and its use.

I'll have to second this. Range bands are getting popular, and as far as I can tell, they are "design for designers". In practice, they work a lot less well.

Eh, they work pretty well when you don't actually track them too hard.

As long as you keep it to "you are this far from your target" it plays much better than it reads, in my experience. Has never actually been a problem in the games I've run or played in, at least.

I have used range bands. They work better in L5R than in some games (assuming you don't think about them too much).

I think they work better in ArM5 tan in L5R5. But in either case, IME, the less attention you pay to range bands, the better they work.

Well, yeah, range bands work until you actually need them, so why bother with them in the first place if that's the case. I do hope EDGE entertainment publish a revised edition in the next 2 years because the conflict chapter totally needs to be rebuilt.

No, not "until you need them". They work just fine when you do.

It's just a pain to try and keep all range bands between everything on the field up to date at once.

So don't. Only actually "calculate" the bands when someone tries to do something.

On 6/3/2020 at 4:47 AM, Myrion said:

Eh, they work pretty well when you don't actually track them too hard.

See? This statement right here. Range bands don't work.

I mean, I'm sure you can do it that way too - it's just more effort than it's worth.

If you keep it mostly as theater of the mind, with a simple map - it has worked just fine for us.

On 7/1/2020 at 3:43 PM, Myrion said:

I mean, I'm sure you can do it that way too - it's just more effort than it's worth.

If you keep it mostly as theater of the mind, with a simple map - it has worked just fine for us.

There is so much tactical cheese that you can do with techniques and opportunities that it becomes a "gamey" theatre of the mind. Sure if your players are not really aware of all the rules and details it can EASILY be skipped (for the best).

On 7/1/2020 at 1:56 PM, sidescroller said:

See? This statement right here. Range bands don't work.

There's a huge difference between sensible approximation and destined to fail video game simulator. As a rule of thumb, if PCs are asking what they can and cannot do because of target distance, that's an appropriate use of range bands (and it does work). If it would take longer to explain distances between targets on the figurative screen (or actual whiteboard) than complete a player's turn that round, maybe it's time to make life simpler and more fun for everyone involved. Now I'm curious if anyone has ever successfully played using strict range band rules with more than two PCs at the table.

We did, it was awful. And really, technically, you don't need range bands at all for 2 characters involved in a Conflict (which qualifies as a duel), because the special rules for duels say that you ignore range bands (which doesn't make sense at all). So in theory, you could have a Kakita Duelist striking back a Moto cavalry archer that is just shooting arrows from horseback from far away, but somehow the Kakita's katana will strike true.

3 hours ago, Diogo Salazar said:

We did, it was awful. And really, technically, you don't need range bands at all for 2 characters involved in a Conflict (which qualifies as a duel), because the special rules for duels say that you ignore range bands (which doesn't make sense at all). So in theory, you could have a Kakita Duelist striking back a Moto cavalry archer that is just shooting arrows from horseback from far away, but somehow the Kakita's katana will strike true.

I'd just like to point out that a two-person skirmish is not the same thing as a duel.

Technically, there are no 2-person skirmish, of course, every group can rule otherwise. but

Emphasis on the last phrase. Not all conflict duels are formal duels.

No, but even a warrior's duel or a clash on a battlefield is not the same as what you'd described. The horse archer is not engaging in a duel in that situation, he's just pelting a distant target that can't quite catch up. There's no reason to put him on a strife clock at all, it doesn't match the fiction in the least.

Two archers, on the other hand, you could arguably put into a ranged duel.

3 hours ago, Diogo Salazar said:

Technically, there are no 2-person skirmish, of course, every group can rule otherwise. but

Emphasis on the last phrase. Not all conflict duels are formal duels.

I realise that this is getting remarkably semantic, but in my reading, a contest is not the same thing as a conflict.

So, your ronin is walking down the street.

• A thug jumps out from a side-alley and attacks him - skirmish.
• Another ronin steps out in front of him and says 'this town aint big enough for the two of us - duel
• A magistrate steps out and says 'come with me, you're under arrest' - intrigue

We are all free to disagree of course, and honestly, that's one of the things it bothers me with narrative systems because most often than not, the texts are not, to borrow a computational term, context-free grammar, so interpretations can vary from group to group.

By your examples above, I would rule out this way:

• A thug jumps out from a side-alley and attacks him -> if the thug had the proper ninjutsu for attacking someone unaware, they roll the test to see its resolution and if the target is still standing, a duel begins.
• Another rõnin steps out in front of him and says 'this town aint big enough for the two of us -> duel
• A magistrate steps out and says 'come with me, you're under arrest' -> it could be an intrigue or a duel depending on the answer of the character, if the character answers if something like "you will never catch me alive" or attempts to draw its weapon, that would be a duel. Otherwise, I agree with you, it would be a conflict where the rõnin tries to convince the magistrate that he should go free.

16 minutes ago, Myrion said:

No, but even a warrior's duel or a clash on a battlefield is not the same as what you'd described. The horse archer is not engaging in a duel in that situation, he's just pelting a distant target that can't quite catch up. There's no reason to put him on a strife clock at all, it doesn't match the fiction in the least.

Two archers, on the other hand, you could arguably put into a ranged duel.

Oh, I agree that it doesn't make sense. I'm just saying that rules as written, it's a valid approach. I mean, if it had been, instead of a Moto Cavalry Archer, a Moto charging on horseback, lance in hand against a Kakita Duelist? Would you agree it could be interpreted as a duel then? I'm just saying that in both scenarios, if the Moto is far away from the Kakita, somehow, the Kakita can still strike back becase the rules for duel contradict itself saying that they are always in range of their opponent effects but moving for position is still part of the narrative. You can't have both ways. If somehow I'm playing as a Daidoji Iron Warrior armed with a yari trying to keep my Matsu Berserker opponent out of reach with her katana (which is a sensible tactic, honestly) how come the Matsu can still attack from range 2-3 without the proper katas?

No, I wouldn't agree. Just because the rules could be abused to make a duel out of any one on one fight, doesn't make it make sense in the least.

13 hours ago, Diogo Salazar said:

We are all free to disagree of course, and honestly, that's one of the things it bothers me with narrative systems because most often than not, the texts are not, to borrow a computational term, context-free grammar, so interpretations can vary from group to group.

By your examples above, I would rule out this way:

• A thug jumps out from a side-alley and attacks him -> if the thug had the proper ninjutsu for attacking someone unaware, they roll the test to see its resolution and if the target is still standing, a duel begins.
• Another rõnin steps out in front of him and says 'this town aint big enough for the two of us -> duel
• A magistrate steps out and says 'come with me, you're under arrest' -> it could be an intrigue or a duel depending on the answer of the character, if the character answers if something like "you will never catch me alive" or attempts to draw its weapon, that would be a duel. Otherwise, I agree with you, it would be a conflict where the rõnin tries to convince the magistrate that he should go free.

I highly doubt a street thug would require the approval of their daimyo to initiate the formal resolution of grievances through ritualized martial conflict. Sure, there could be an unsanctioned duel between samurai who are bitter rivals, but the formal procession still exists to maintain a semblance of honor. Range bands aren't required in a duel with melee weapons because leaving is tantamount to forfeiture and we can safely assume opponents are tethered together.

Again, a duel (as in a conflict) is not the same as a formal duel. It’s basically a one-on-one martial contest with a clock so it can finish rather quick and the rest of the group can play as well. And of course range bands should matter. As I pointed earlier, if I bring a naginata to a tantō fight, I’m sorry for the tantō wielder but I won’t let him approach me, but somehow in duels, this is ignored.

A duel (as the conflict type) is for anything that would be called a duel in-universe. Sadane (possibly), a Warrior's Duel, a Clash on the battlefield, a formal iaijutsu duel, sumai etc. It involves a challenge, terms, often judges, and some sort of tense staredown.

It is not just anything. A single cornered thug versus a magistrate is not a duel. There's no staredown, no two warriors on at least roughly equal footing, no-one sets any terms or conditions nothing.

Again, there's nothing stopping you from misusing the rules, but don't complain if the game doesn't work well for you in that case.