Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

1. Dynasty Pack: Tears of Amaterasu


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1
Ignithas

Ignithas

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 443 posts

https://www.fantasyf...s-of-amaterasu/


  • NuFenix and xRAVEx like this

#2
Vorrt

Vorrt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Kaede > Tsukune, in my opinion.


  • phillosmaster likes this

#3
nightcrawlers

nightcrawlers

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts

I really dig the unicorn/scorpion cards.



#4
Ignithas

Ignithas

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Kaede will improve the Phoenix deck a lot.


  • phillosmaster likes this

#5
Cambeul

Cambeul

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts

How does Kaede work?

 

So Kaede attacks selecting Ring of Water lets say.

 

So during the Conflict the Ring has the properties of both Water (potential use Covert) and Void (activating Atsuko's action).

 

Ok so now you won the Conflict: If this character wins the conflict as an attack, instead of choosing an element to resolve, resolve each of that Ring's effects.

 

I assume they mean, in the example of Ring of Water, instead of Bow or Straighten a guy, you get to do both. 

 

Or after I read the page, is it you get to resolve both Ring of the Void and Ring of Water (bow or straighten?)



#6
Vorrt

Vorrt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 417 posts

From the readings, the attack now contains the Elemental properties for both Void and Water, so you would get to resolve both effects (remove a fate;  Bow/Unbow).   Which with Water becomes really interesting, as you can remove a Fate (from Kaede's Void effect) from a bigger threat not in the combat and then bow it with Water.

 

 

Same idea w/Fire:  Remove fate, Dishonor character (not as potent, but still a shut down maneuver)

 

 

I don't know if you would get to do double void though if you attacked with a Void challenge.



#7
estyles

estyles

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 646 posts

Kitsuki Yaruma - what happens if you Charge him into battle at the province he is in and then turn that province face down?  Are you battling at a blank province now?



#8
nightcrawlers

nightcrawlers

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts

Kitsuki Yaruma - what happens if you Charge him into battle at the province he is in and then turn that province face down?  Are you battling at a blank province now?


My best guess is it flips down then instantly back up and is resolved immediately as if it was turned up for the first time. Just a guess

#9
mplain

mplain

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1442 posts

Kitsuki Yaruma - what happens if you Charge him into battle at the province he is in and then turn that province face down?  Are you battling at a blank province now?

 
I believe this situation is covered by this rule:
 

Facedown province

- If a facedown province becomes the attacked province in a manner other than the declaration of an attack, immediately turn the province faceup.


I think you can roughly equate "if a facedown province becomes the attacked province" with "if the attacked province becomes a facedown province".



#10
HidaHonk

HidaHonk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 461 posts

Finally some shadowlands love. I like it!



#11
Asklepios

Asklepios

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 5433 posts

Gotta say, I love the idea of a Crane Courtier shutting down a military attack with a disdainful remark.

 

"Oh my, what big horses you Unicorns have between your legs. Trying to compensate are we?"


  • sparrowhawk likes this

#12
sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2038 posts

Gotta say, I love the idea of a Crane Courtier shutting down a military attack with a disdainful remark.

"Oh my, what big horses you Unicorns have between your legs. Trying to compensate are we?"


It's an amusing vision when a humble doji whisperer prevents the lion military horde breaking a province, strengthened by their art of war, from breaking the province for the cost of 1C1F. It also fits with much and more, sorry perfect gift (I forget the AH name for the card).

However, one tiny issue I have with the Core pool is that the neutral conflict cards are just so good as a rule that 3 core gets you 2 simultaneous decks (contingency and fallen being the exceptions - and the latter is playable in Crab Unicorn defensive kill). The card effectively reads prevent the breaking of a province which is huge but it has 2 conditions (only in defence, courtier present) and doesn't deny the ring or other win effects and cost the same as a move home outwit which can be used in attack and can actually influence the winner. With conflict deck space so tight, I can't see the deliciously named disdainful remark ever making the cut. Maybe x1 at most as an end game surprise survival to counter attack for the win.

At least crane can use their card, unlike poor lion. Clan-specific seeker and keeper cards - I've never seen a game with cards unplayable on release before!

Initially liking roles, I now really resent the artificial constraint they impose. I guess it appeals to the CCG with its Lore Above All emphasis but the LCG competitive players must surely feel constrained by other people's decisions. Hmmm.

Even if roles are good, clan role cards you can't play is making the Bad Cards from the outset illusion far too visible, highlighting we are being sold dross.

Maybe they will change role rules. I like that they have living rules like board games where passing a law changed the rules (twilight Imperium etc). Maybe one of the decisions that the Hatamotos can decide on may be the prevalence of roles - why can't we at least use the 3 not picked as well? So we just reserve 1 per clan (anti-ranking order in my view). It seems madness to have 3 cards nobody can play in the Core Set.

Anyway, back to the pack. It feels like they have learnt from Litzinger and are carefully offering tiny incremental power creep with each pack, maybe exploring other themes (like Honour/Dishonour). The fact that many of the cards previewed are interesting and add to the game without being "must have" (Kaede is exception as a Shugenja and letting Phoenix multi-colour, gaining huge Void benefit in other Rings - and Air with Seeker of Knowledge). If each pack only significantly improves 1 clan in turn, then that would slow down the buy in cost of late entrants as getting every pack as well will be less vital (but we completists will get them anyway). Netrunner Core was evergreen relevant to the game. Hope it's the same with L5R to keep attracting late entrants.
  • Asklepios likes this

#13
Asklepios

Asklepios

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 5433 posts

tldr.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm kidding, I'm kidding!


  • sparrowhawk likes this

#14
sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2038 posts

tldr.


I find it amusing that first Joe and then yourself, two of the longer posters in the hobby, mentioning length of my posts. I look forward to using it back on you once you get into your stride (very happy you are joining this hobby).

Maybe short little snippets are what's needed in today's You Tube society. Instead of a post that discusses:

- disdainful remark
- core neutral conflicts restricting multiple decks
- clan role-specific cards
- unplayable in competition 3 role cards they sold us
- benefits of minimal power creep for late entry
- Kaede as the only stand out must have previewed

Quite a lot of meat in the post if people want to take a bite from it...

#15
OutOfFactionWarlord

OutOfFactionWarlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts

I'm glad that a standard purchase of 3 cores can get you two competitive decks, that's better than requiring several more cores.  I do wish there were enough of the neutrals to make three solid decks though, as I think that would make teaching the game to new people a lot better (by giving them a choice / showing there's enough variation).  Then you can build less-competitive decks from the remains, and balance them against each other.  You can start people with those, and then move them to the expert decks to show them what you can do with a full card pool.

 

This is what I've done in the past with Conquest and Thrones.  If you want to learn on a competitive deck, then you play one of my main decks which likely don't play a very great game against each other.  Or you can learn the system with a fun deck in the house you prefer.

 

As for the roles, I'd imagine the majority of smaller tournaments will likely forego enforcing the roles and they'll likely only apply to larger sanctioned tournaments and worlds.  I like the "living rules" idea of the roles and how they move between clans but I dislike how this can have the ability to really pull the power-level down for some clans.  Right now in the core + 1 spoiled pack environment, it also means quite a bit because of the cards you can't use and the lack of access to certain effects.

 

I could see a modification to the rule being fun:  Use your clans role with no penalty, use a role of your choice but suffer an influence penalty or start with X less honor (1?)... we can call these clans "pretenders" or something.

 

This rule would give a benefit to trying to build within your constraints but still allow you to make a deckbuilding decision to take a voluntary disadvantage to focus in a very specific direction.


  • sparrowhawk likes this

#16
michaelius

michaelius

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts

At least crane can use their card, unlike poor lion. Clan-specific seeker and keeper cards - I've never seen a game with cards unplayable on release before!

Initially liking roles, I now really resent the artificial constraint they impose. I guess it appeals to the CCG with its Lore Above All emphasis but the LCG competitive players must surely feel constrained by other people's decisions. Hmmm.

Even if roles are good, clan role cards you can't play is making the Bad Cards from the outset illusion far too visible, highlighting we are being sold dross.
 

 

Yeah it feels like such a huge waste to waste space in chapter packs when game has only core set (if they give 1 seeker and 1 keeper card to each clan we are looking at 14 out of 120 cards wasted)



#17
Asklepios

Asklepios

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 5433 posts

Hopefully FFG will recognise early on that it's mostly competitive players who need more neutral cards, and will make their early promo cards the commonly used neutrals.

 

It was a lifesaver when they did Promotion and Void Pirate for Conquest, but quite late in the game's lifespan.



#18
sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2038 posts
Promotion and Void Pirate - what are these Core Set Conquest cards you mention? Were they played the entirety of the game's life in 95% of decks? If they were, surely the same (otherwise revered) designer is not going to make the same mistake again?

Ubiquity = homogeneity = antithesis of customisation

When Crab plays Court Games, something may have gone wrong in pitching the power level of several neutral conflict cards vs. many in-Clan alternatives. Not even the influence system that can cherry pick from 1 other clan (this needs a name, "allied to" is perhaps too obvious) seems to have affected their inclusion.

In trying to pander to Core Set x1 experience, we have 9 copies of each neutral dynasty rarely seeing play (the French meta play the ronin, the shugenja is otherwise the most common for attachment control). And even though it's annoying waste of cardboard for the full experience, better serviced with more choice in clan dynasty characters than which 1-3 copies of 1-3 characters do I exclude, I can live with instant obsolescence because it doesn't overall harm the meta, it's just wasted opportunity and poor value.

But the opposite applies to a core cadre of neutral conflict cards that are better than half the in-clan options. Which now won't see play unless supported artificially. That's the base line. So say they release enough clan conflict cards in cycle 1 to plausibly remove the Core Set neutrals (let's say 6 conflicts with the 2 in-clan Role conflicts being bonuses to your clan allocated 1 dynasty + 1 conflict in a pack of 20). What they have done is made Core Set x3 too little for semi-competitive late entry.

It's a difficult balancing act, keeping Core Set relevant to later game entrants whilst not homogenising the game with too much neutral card overlap. It would be achievable if one of the objectives was not to also create a Core Set x1 experience.

That's the problem really, the silly Core Set x1 must be playable ideal. It's not, it never will be, a pale imitation that does this amazingly deep mechanically game a disservice as it is too homogenized, not customised enough. They release Twilight Imperium 4 for $150 and it will sell large units as we upgrade. Both my current Kickstarters (Rising Sun, Lords of Hellas) are near $200 each and same with my friends. Hardcore gamers invest heavily in fewer games these days (because storage space is premium). But when it comes to LCGs, they harm the brand of the game by over-homogenising with too strong neutrals in a Core Set to pander to the diluted Core x1 "market" that then get a poor impression of the game and spread it by word of mouth (a few friends bought Thrones Core x1 and disliked it as too luck dependent which it is in that illegal format).

I think we've got to applaud the mechanical design of the game and be very grateful the structure is so deep and clever - perhaps the deepest card game out there? But card power levels, homogeneity, late entrants barriers, these are issues that should be organically fed back (they did consciously up the power level of Elites in Conquest, perhaps too far).

The Istaril front page article on configuring by faction with a Neutrals Core Set is of course the long-term solution for an eternal LCG. But because they want us to buy wide, not buy tall, this makes it prohibitive for late entrants to both buy wide and buy long hence the model is doomed to dwindle. They try and compensate by lurching in power levels between factions so that competitive players switch and get full value in buying wide and long over time (that's my charitable reason for FFG pendulum imbalance). Those who haven't read Istaril's article who care about a sustainable LCG format should read it.

Usual hungover weekend morning rambling discussion on a new LCG.

Anyway, this is the pack 1 thread and we've side tracked it enough. Every time I see a card pool issue that irks me, I remind myself that this depth of card game is what I've been waiting for, the mechanics are the best to date and the aesthetics are gorgeous too, plus it's my 2nd favourite world (after 7th Sea). It ticks all the boxes for me.

It thus feels churlish to criticise this almost-masterpiece. But any criticism I've made is because you so want it to be better, almost perfect. You hope someone somewhere with clout may get to read it and agree. Seeking perfection is a very Dragon / Phoenix ideal anyway.
  • Caldera likes this

#19
nightcrawlers

nightcrawlers

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
My god

#20
michaelius

michaelius

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts

Hopefully FFG will recognise early on that it's mostly competitive players who need more neutral cards, and will make their early promo cards the commonly used neutrals.

 

 

Oh I'm sure they know it but there's chance some people will buy 6 core sets instead :D