by saying gender norms make these unnecessary, that's pretty much what you're implying, or I am missing something in your reasoning

13 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

irl example: if necessity and efficiency were what decided everything, you wouldn't have the papal guard still lugging halberds in rainbow colored uniforms in the vatican, you would always see them with their much more subdued and efficient modern uniforms and firearms, and they'd be italian not swiss

To be fair, whenever the Pope goes visiting other places, the Swiss Guard will be there in black suits carrying pistols to protect him and sure as **** there are those around the Vatican as well as the colourful carrying halberds ones. And the reason they are swiss and not italians comes to the fact that Italy is a very young country and most of the Italian Nobility were fighting the Pope most of the time than actually kneeling for him, the Swiss Mercenaries in this case were morr reliable security than italians, alas, the tradition remains and yes, you proved a point there, Certain things in Rokugan happen because of tradition and the inertia it brings down the centuries.

1 minute ago, Diogo Salazar said:

To be fair, whenever the Pope goes visiting other places, the Swiss Guard will be there in black suits carrying pistols to protect him and sure as **** there are those around the Vatican as well as the colourful carrying halberds ones. And the reason they are swiss and not italians comes to the fact that Italy is a very young country and most of the Italian Nobility were fighting the Pope most of the time than actually kneeling for him, the Swiss Mercenaries in this case were morr reliable security than italians, alas, the tradition remains and yes, you proved a point there, Certain things in Rokugan happen because of tradition and the inertia it brings down the centuries.

fun historical fact: it's also because in the middle age the swiss mercenariy pikemen were the scariest bad*ss motherf-ers of Europe, they were so feared european monarchs were having bidding wars so the other side didn't employ them in their armies. Look up their history on the bad*ssotheweek site ( https://www.badassoftheweek.com/swisspikemen ), these guys were HARCORE

16 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

by saying gender norms make these unnecessary, that's pretty much what you're implying, or I am missing something in your reasoning

The original, default version of Rokugan was presented as largely patriarchal. Having the Utaku, Matsu, and Moshi families was nice for players who wanted to play a character with a background counter to that patriarchy. If, in the interest of creating a space that is more comfortable for your players, your version of Rokugan has greater gender equality (and I think FFG at least takes some strides in that direction), I don't think having alternatives feels as necessary. That isn't saying you can't still have them.

samurai-ko were a thing since 1st ed

as for rokugan leaning towards being more patriarchal, well:

1- ancient china & japan were totally patriarchal and they're the inspiration

2- 20 years ago, our society didn't really believe in women gamers existence

so sure, the setting evolved withour society but saying the matriarchal families have been made irrelevant by the lore evolution isn't true imho. ofc that's my opinion but the lore easily explains why these would exist

11 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

2- 20 years ago, our society didn't really believe in women gamers existence

Which is bizarre considering a lot of them were involved in early 70s-80s DnD but somehow it became a boys club in the 90s

lived through it but can't really tell you what went through others' heads tbh

given we were just out of the DnD satanist hysteria, can only say the hobby got weird at times

34 minutes ago, Diogo Salazar said:

Which is bizarre considering a lot of them were involved in early 70s-80s DnD but somehow it became a boys club in the 90s

That must have been the early '90s then, because Vampire was released in '91, and brought more girls into the hobby than I'd ever seen before.

There may have been some differences based on location though.

44 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

saying the matriarchal families have been made irrelevant by the lore evolution isn't true imho.

You keep making these straw man arguments. I don't think you're doing it intentionally, but I'm not sure how to more simply express the idea.

The idea is only that a matriarchal family in a patriarchal world reads different than a matriarchal family in a world with gender equality. Can you still do it? Of course.

34 minutes ago, MonCalamariAgainstDrunkDriving said:

You keep making these straw man arguments. I don't think you're doing it intentionally, but I'm not sure how to more simply express the idea.

The idea is only that a matriarchal family in a patriarchal world reads different than a matriarchal family in a world with gender equality. Can you still do it? Of course.

straw man? excuse me?

1 hour ago, MonCalamariAgainstDrunkDriving said:

The original, default version of Rokugan was presented as largely patriarchal. Having the Utaku, Matsu, and Moshi families was nice for players who wanted to play a character with a background counter to that patriarchy. If , in the interest of creating a space that is more comfortable for your players, your version of Rokugan has greater gender equality (and I think FFG at least takes some strides in that direction), I don't think having alternatives feels as necessary . That isn't saying you can't still have them.

your words, not mine. and as I mentioned before, samurai-ko of any clan exist since 1st ed

what exactly do you want? I don't get it, on one hand you're saying you're not bothered by them, on the other you're saying you feel they're unnecessary, and as justification you're just saying there's a different feel just because lore was modified to reflect more equality

what exactly is your point there?

38 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

straw man? excuse me?

your words, not mine. and as I mentioned before, samurai-ko of any clan exist since 1st ed

what exactly do you want? I don't get it, on one hand you're saying you're not bothered by them, on the other you're saying you feel they're unnecessary, and as justification you're just saying there's a different feel just because lore was modified to reflect more equality

what exactly is your point there?

Well, the samurai-ko as depicted in first edition was a woman that vowed to not marry and fight for his lord. So there was some degree of sexism anyway...

Again, toning down the patriarchal society is a good thing to make sure more women get invested in the game, I totally get that, but some woman might be comfortable (while others may not) in play a Mulan type, hiding her gender and stuff for bigger drama. In the end, every group does what they think is best for the group anyway.

7 minutes ago, Diogo Salazar said:

Well, the samurai-ko as depicted in first edition was a woman that vowed to not marry and fight for his lord. So there was some degree of sexism anyway...

Again, toning down the patriarchal society is a good thing to make sure more women get invested in the game, I totally get that, but some woman might be comfortable (while others may not) in play a Mulan type, hiding her gender and stuff for bigger drama. In the end, every group does what they think is best for the group anyway.

aaah, so your problem is only missing on the "hiding your gender" narrative?

that isn't really a manageable thing in rokugan due to the honor rules anyway but tbh I don't even see why you think it's a problem, narratively there can be a million reasons for a samurai on a quest to hide his/her identity and gender

I think playing a "Mulan" type character in L5R would not give the shock value that a player would like when the truth is revealed. Just look at all the legendary female characters in L5R's history, within lore.

For example, 4 out of the 7 Thunders during the first Day of Thunder are female; Lady Matsu, Otaku (now Utaku), Shosuro, and Doji Konishiko. Not only that, they are remembered as heroes within the setting.

Not to mention Hantei Murasaki, the third ruler of the Emerald Empire - she was also female in this history.

2 hours ago, MB -Fr- said:

what exactly is your point there?

For literally the fourth time, my point is:

2 hours ago, MB -Fr- said:

The idea is only that a matriarchal family in a patriarchal world reads different than a matriarchal family in a world with gender equality.

Do you disagree with that?

Re-reading what I wrote, I think I'm being a bit of a jerk. I'm sorry, @MB -Fr- .

4 hours ago, BlindSamurai13 said:

I think playing a "Mulan" type character in L5R would not give the shock value that a player would like when the truth is revealed. Just look at all the legendary female characters in L5R's history, within lore.

For example, 4 out of the 7 Thunders during the first Day of Thunder are female; Lady Matsu, Otaku (now Utaku), Shosuro, and Doji Konishiko. Not only that, they are remembered as heroes within the setting.

To be completely fair, it was 3 guys, 3 gals and one gender- fluid emphasis on fluid because Shosuro could be put as the dictionary definition for that word. So in way, L5R was ahead of its time with the chosen Champions.

4 hours ago, MB -Fr- said:

aaah, so your problem is only missing on the "hiding your gender" narrative?

that isn't really a manageable thing in rokugan due to the honor rules anyway but tbh I don't even see why you think it's a problem, narratively there can be a million reasons for a samurai on a quest to hide his/her identity and gender

Ah, I guess I wasn't particularly clear, my problem is that in older editions, it meant that playing a female warrior would be about giving up the possibility of family because you can't marry OR playing as a Matsu or Utaku or hiding that you are a girl from other people. A female member of the Kuge or Buke is expected to act as a courtier, priest or artisan but pretty much never a bushi unless being from the two families mentioned before. To take another setting heavily patriarchal, to play as warrior you would have to play as Arya Stark or Asha Greyjoy.

In this current setting, no one bats an eye if a Mirumoto lady takes up her brother's daisho and trains to become a warrior but in the old lore, we were remembered again and again how Hitomi was weird in a Clan composed of weirdos by the definitions of the rest of Rokugan for taking up arms. Same thing with Hida O-Ushi, where, basically she was pretty much treated as a son by Hida Kisada.

To me the issues here is not, is full gender equality a good or a bad thing for the average game group. That is always going to depend on the group and the story they want to tell. (Rokugan your way!)

The issues is the same as the gender swap of Hoturi to Hotaru and trying to keep the same story. Does it belittle things like the battle-maidens forbidding men to ride, do the true matriarch families become a foot note that doesn't matter, or turn a tragic love triangle into a head-scratcher?

Overall when thing like a female run family/Clan or a reverse sexism are counteracted by the setting having full gender equality, what is the point of them being in the story at all. It's the old writing staple " If there is no conflict there is no story". So why have it in there? (Pandering)

As for the idea that there where few or no female gamers. Having played in the 80-90's I can insure you there were. I think the issues and perception stems from the media and public view at the time of gamers as nerds and outcast. This could also have been helped along by the fact that female gamers (at lest from what I saw) tended to find isolated groups to play with and avoided gaming stores. I can say the reason my ex-girlfriend and my sister-in-law avoided them was they where uncomfortable with being in the stores with mostly men they didn't know, which is sad because they are some of the best players I know. so this would lead to a public perception that females didn't game that the media would pickup on. And just to be clear, this is my opinions on why and not facts.

37 minutes ago, tenchi2a said:

To me the issues here is not, is full gender equality a good or a bad thing for the average game group. That is always going to depend on the group and the story they want to tell. (Rokugan your way!)

The issues is the same as the gender swap of Hoturi to Hotaru and trying to keep the same story. Does it belittle things like the battle-maidens forbidding men to ride, do the true matriarch families become a foot note that doesn't matter, or turn a tragic love triangle into a head-scratcher?

Overall when thing like a female run family/Clan or a reverse sexism are counteracted by the setting having full gender equality, what is the point of them being in the story at all. It's the old writing staple " If there is no conflict there is no story". So why have it in there? (Pandering)

As for the idea that there where few or no female gamers. Having played in the 80-90's I can insure you there were. I think the issues and perception stems from the media and public view at the time of gamers as nerds and outcast. This could also have been helped along by the fact that female gamers (at lest from what I saw) tended to find isolated groups to play with and avoided gaming stores. I can say the reason my ex-girlfriend and my sister-in-law avoided them was they where uncomfortable with being in the stores with mostly men they didn't know, which is sad because they are some of the best players I know. so this would lead to a public perception that females didn't game that the media would pickup on. And just to be clear, this is my opinions on why and not facts.

I can tell you in the 90s female gamers were far fewer. Not non existent just much much rater

In my opinion the setting is generally very gender-equal, but there are parts with different traditions for historical reasons. In these, I would include

• the Matsu and Ikoma, who in many ways are continuing their founders' rivalry through the centuries
• the Utaku, traditions that developed outside of Rokugan in a different environment and are now central to the family's identity
• the Moshi, a clan founded and acting as direct servants of the Goddess

I would also make some assumptions about a couple of other things

• Onnotangu cults are probably patriarchal, for various reasons
• There are bits and pieces of families and minor clans with their own take and gender roles that aren't in the story but can be used in the game for appropriate purposes.

On 8/26/2020 at 12:08 AM, Tenebrae said:

How do you know that? We played it that you choose your action and stance, write it down, and then both reveal simultaneously. If your opponent chose predict and the exact stance you'd picked, you (probably) really will feel surprised and pushed off balance. Exactly how predict is supposed to work.

That is a good idea but i would implement following modification: both players choose secretly only their next stance after the staredown (so they know who will be going first, must choose stance but still can adjust their action to the situation) but not their action. They still reveal and change their stance only on their turn then choose action. Like this predict makes more sense because indeed knowing what action chose your adversary that is supposed to have initiative is not gratifying. The change to rules remains minor. PRoblem is secod player have no interest to use predict as it will take effect only next round so his opponent will know he did predict and can adjust his stance.

I think if they were to revise the rules, the Strife/Composure Fatigue/Endurance brings no end of confusion to players who are used to other systems. I think the system just needs a bit of refinement and clarity. Personally I'd prefer they rework it so you just have Damage targeting Endurance and Composure. And Critical Wounds / Unmasking. And the sheet should have tracking boxes like every other RPG system where you just tick them off.

I'd also Unify Wounds so it's for all rings, might make it deadlier, but also simpler, and similar to Warhammer Fantasy for example.

The revised book should have a reorganization of text, with some important text-boxes actual sections for clarity. The rules options in the FAQ should also be included. The entire conflicts chapter should be rewritten and refined.

But, it mostly should be compatible with existing 5th edition content, just easier to use.

Unifying wounds would make the game even deadlier, like, 1st edition deadly. I don’t know, I think if you want to go this way, then the grittier option does that better already.

I agree on the rewrite of the chapter conflict but disagree on changing crits. Unmasking works fine as it is, the only moment you should worry is during a duel.