• Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.

    If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.

    - The Lone Wolf Development Team

Another L5R question

  • Thread starter Thread starter doc_savage_2001 at yahoo.
  • Start date Start date
D

doc_savage_2001 at yahoo.

Guest
OK, my Doomtrooper, Heroclix, and Shadowfist cards are done. Time to
start in earnest on sorting and entering my L5R cards.

a couple questions:

what do I do again about Otaku Kamoko and all the other Otakus? Just
enter them as is? Where is the part where they get defined as Utaku
handled again?

Also, before Gold, Ancestors were Followers and sometime in the dim
reaches of L5R history, Rings were Actions. How should I enter
Ancestors and Rings for those sets? As the actual card type they were
at the time? Or the card type they've become?

Thanks,
Doc
 
--- "doc_savage_2001 <doc_savage_2001@yahoo.com>" <doc_savage_2001@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> OK, my Doomtrooper, Heroclix, and Shadowfist cards are done. Time to
> start in earnest on sorting and entering my L5R cards.
>
> a couple questions:
>
> what do I do again about Otaku Kamoko and all the other Otakus? Just
> enter them as is? Where is the part where they get defined as Utaku
> handled again?

Use the Equiv field to make all the Otaku versions equivalent to the Utaku
version.

> Also, before Gold, Ancestors were Followers and sometime in the dim
> reaches of L5R history, Rings were Actions. How should I enter
> Ancestors and Rings for those sets? As the actual card type they were
> at the time? Or the card type they've become?

I would recommend leaving them as their own type (Ancestors and Rings,
respectively). It will make searching for Ancestors or Rings easier. Otherwise
people will have to filter for the card name to find all of the rings, rather
than just the card type.


=====
---

Kuni Tetsu
Clan War rules guy
Moderator of ClanWar-l

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
 
At 12:02 PM 12/16/2002 -0800, Kuni Tetsu wrote:
>I would recommend leaving them as their own type (Ancestors and Rings,
>respectively). It will make searching for Ancestors or Rings easier. Otherwise
>people will have to filter for the card name to find all of the rings, rather
>than just the card type.

You guys really are having a lot of trouble with all those
rings. It's so much easier when you only have One...

Mark.

--
Scientists have shown that the moon is moving away at a tiny yet
measurable distance from the earth every year. If you do the math, you
can calculate that 85 million years ago the moon was orbiting the earth
at a distance of about 35 feet. This would explain the death of the
dinosaurs. Well, the tall ones, anyway. -- Unknown
 
--- In cardvault@yahoogroups.com, Kuni Tetsu <kuni_tetsu@y...> wrote:
> Use the Equiv field to make all the Otaku versions equivalent to
the Utaku
> version.

Looking at the data files, right now there are only 4 Utaku
personalities? If so, that shouldn't be too hard. :)
>
> I would recommend leaving them as their own type (Ancestors and
Rings,
> respectively). It will make searching for Ancestors or Rings
easier. Otherwise
> people will have to filter for the card name to find all of the
rings, rather
> than just the card type.

OK, good, that's what I had been doing.

Thanks for the input,
Doc
 
At 12:02 PM 12/16/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> > Also, before Gold, Ancestors were Followers and sometime in the dim
> > reaches of L5R history, Rings were Actions. How should I enter
> > Ancestors and Rings for those sets? As the actual card type they were
> > at the time? Or the card type they've become?
>
>I would recommend leaving them as their own type (Ancestors and Rings,
>respectively). It will make searching for Ancestors or Rings easier. Otherwise
>people will have to filter for the card name to find all of the rings, rather
>than just the card type.

You might also consider tag those cards as BOTH types. This way, they would
show up appropriately via either search method.

Just something to consider....

-Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (559) 658-6995
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
 
--- Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com> wrote:
> You might also consider tag those cards as BOTH types. This way, they would
> show up appropriately via either search method.

I thought about that... but unless someone is only using the pre-gold rules as
well as the cards, it is not necessary. Even if they are using the old rules,
those cards are treated differently than other cards of their type anyway, so
it should not be much of an adjustment for the user.

Granted, it would not take much to use both tags, so why not, but let's get the
old data working first, we can add the extra tag as a last bit of polish.


=====
---

Kuni Tetsu
Clan War rules guy
Moderator of ClanWar-l

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
 
> Also, before Gold, Ancestors were Followers and sometime in the dim
> reaches of L5R history, Rings were Actions. How should I enter
> Ancestors and Rings for those sets? As the actual card type they were
> at the time? Or the card type they've become?

I leave them as separate card types, myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top