OOC Chatter

[Usogawa Narumi]

Holy fuck.

[Usogawa Emiko]

I got part way through reading that and gave up.

Give me assessment focus strike back

[Seppun Yuzu]

I like that you can pick a Ring with your “approach”. That’s the coolest thing about the 5E mechanics. And that Seppun Palace Guard is not a weak Bushi School. The Speed of Heavens makes every sense and it is extremely useful.

[Suzume Senseki]

To all that was said before - it is a narrative system, so if it's more your thing, and you want no moving around, circling opponent nor anything of the kind, you can just as easily assume "defended" strikes are you looking at the opponent for an opening, the other one noticing that and the tenseness of the process wearing him down - mentally and physically.

Maybe a different system could be designed just for that, but then it would have to interact with fatigue, strife, stances, techniques and so on. Not an easy thing to do, I'd say.

Also, in terms of how it plays, I feel the idea was to replace a system that was basically just some rolls, without that much choice to them. Maybe where to spend void. As I said before, it adds strategy to it, and interactions, which I believe was done to give the process something else for those involved to do. I find that fun, as I said. Maybe I'm just a fan of complicated tabletop games, but especially knowing where FFG comes from, I think that's the appeal they're looking for there.

I know it's not a perfect system by far, the way things are shown in te book is really confusing, and it gets overly complicated at times. So do card games and complicated tabletop games when you get to things like the timing of actions.

But then to specifically answer what seems to be one of the main feelings

Give me assessment focus strike back

As I said, that would probably mean "three checks, not much choice", as in 4e. Could it be done in 5e? Maybe. But as I said, making that interact with the other moving parts in the system is not easy at all.

And then I come back to: ok, you don't like 5e. That's fine, I don't like GURPS, and I don't like some other systems. We all have a system we hate. Or a version of a game. But then if I decide to get into a DnD 4e game and hate things about it (which is likely!), would it make much sense to keep suggesting changes to make it more like 5e?

I mean, as has been said before, maybe 'just play 4e' might be the answer for those who hate the system so much?

Not trying to be a dick at all here, mind. I just feel the comments have been very inflammatory, and in the end many of them seem to boil down to "I hate 5e"... In which case just not playing 5e games might be an option to not get so inflamed

[Kitsuki Hajime]

I broadly enjoy the system, and I like the strategic aspects to the duel. To be honest, I also enjoy the 4e duels as well. They're both fun.

I do have an issue with the flat strife increases at the beginning of each round. I feel like they foreshorten the event, which detracts from the strategic aspect. And while modeling tension is a good thing, I feel like the dice on each roll do that anyway.

On the other hand, I like the predict thing. I like it being a challenge to get your sword out and ready unless you conceive of the duel in a particular way. I like the benefits associated with the different approaches. Those are neat.

[Moto Mitsuki]

I agree 5ed dueling rules have many issues (dear designers: interrupt actions are never a good idea)... But pretending 4ed rules are good is close to gaslighting.

First major issue: The Kakita are just so much stronger than anyone else it's not even funny. Even the Mirumoto, supposedly their greatest rivals, don't stand a chance against them.

Second major issue: A duel is very much decided by how much XP has been poured into optimizing your character dice pool for duels, through adequate balance of Void, Air, Iai, and maybe kata like The Empire rests on Its Edge. There's a complexity to it too, but it happens at character creation, and is even more hidden by the fact 4ed is so old by now the good recipes are known and can just be applied as is.

When the actual duel happens in game, there's no strategy but to spend Void on each roll and to pray.

[Kitsu Moshumaru]

I think we'll probably implode if we continue to try and come to a consensus as to which is better (even if we have our own individual answers), so I'm gonna propose for now we focus on the good elements than the bad, and try and ride a good feelings train until the end of the game, after which I will happily take my place at the debate table.

(Although worth noting: I am working on a 4e rework with some others, and duelling is something we'll be looking at, and am currently working on a complete redesign for a more PBP friendly duelling system for 5e. Make of these what you will.)

That said, Moto Mitsuki has done great work with Sakkaku, and Saibankan's done great work with the game.

[Moto Mitsuki]

Which means my Seasoned Bishamon-Blessed Earth 3, Water 3 Soldier-duty guy is completely tuckered out after evading two swings with a bokken.

Fun fact: There's a kata called Warrior's Resolve that heals Fatigue nicely and would have been perfect here.

The Ikoma Bards always start with it (not even optional, they have to have it). Not the Shiba.

Clearly, Raizo was always outmatched.

(I don't have enough experience with the system to judge balance, but the Lion schools in general seem... let's say nice)

[Kitsu Moshumaru]

Fun fact: There's a kata called Warrior's Resolve that heals Fatigue nicely and would have been perfect here.

The Ikoma Bards always start with it (not even optional, they have to have it). Not the Shiba.

Clearly, Raizo was always outmatched.

(I don't have enough experience with the system to judge balance, but the Lion schools in general seem... let's say nice)

From my understanding, there's three main strategies for 5e duels:

1)Earth based you (cannot) crit me

2)Fire/Air instagib

3)Compromise kill

The Ikoma bard has a little bit of everything for all three.
It has warrior's resolve, which requires Earth, which you can make 3 by character creation if you go Matsu/Akodo and make earth how you stood out in school.
Fire 3 is easy for a Matsu trained Ikoma bard, and if you can convince your gm to let you taunt your opponent as a special action you can not only use Fan the Flames to inflict dazed but also use the school ability to transfer strife, which helps them with the compromise kill.

[Usogawa Emiko]

I won't go into a 'which system is better' as they're both flawed. In terms of 'which one fit what duelling is in l5R', 4th wins out because it actually makes sense for duelling. No jockying, parrying, dodging. That isn't duelling - first strike, fastest strike. It's a skirmish.