L5r: Legend of the Five Rings Wiki
Advertisement

Yahoo! I just finished creating articles for all the Crab personalities in the game that didn't already have them! I didn't create all of the articles in the category, and most of them are still stubs (my project after creating the stubs and posting the pics is filling the articles in in alphabetical order) but they all have articles! All of the cards with pictures available on L5RSearch and Docangst have been posted with their personalities!

Kakeguchi and Rhyhodotsu[]

I'd like to know whether any feel that I should move these and other vassal family founders to the area of their master family. There's a Gold-era fiction with a Phoenix from a vassal family talking to his master, from the master family before they go explore Kyuden Chuda. It mentions that only within the clan are members of a minor family called by their "true" family name and outsiders really wouldn't even know of their vassal status. Or should I create a sub-sub-heading for the vassal families attached to their master families?- Dapperdanman1983

L5r:Article titles#Vassal families covers the articles themselves. As far as these "Samurai of" pages go, keep the links in the main family's section. It's usually easier to find people that way, because they're generally known by their master family's name. ~ShibaRyu~ Rings.png Calendar.gif 00:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


Tsimari[]

Tsimari was eventually a Crab?Dapperdanman1983 23:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

No. The Toritaka family list on this page also hosts the Samurai of the Falcon Clan. This way we don't have a duplicate list of Toritaka members on the Crab version and Falcon members on the Falcon version... These should probably be split tho. Anyone have any better ideas? --Majushi 09:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually makes sense, I suppose. I guess I'll have to put Iemasa back.Dapperdanman1983 14:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I've decided to split them. There weren't that many that crossed over actually. Iemasa I've set to 9th century and added that the 8th century line is most likely a typo. Only way to reconcile it. --Majushi 15:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Advertisement