A well-meaning thread that degenerated into "is the OA Samuari historically accurate"

[Felon]

I never saw you use the word "balance" at all. I saw you deride the class for not being historically accurate. None of the abilities of the CW samurai are "inappropriate." They're all quite appropriate for a certain type of samurai.

Eh, don't see where all the fear-mongering abilities are core to the samurai especially. I'm a bit torn on the 2-weapon fighting. On the one hand, it's not appropriate to assume all samurai wield an off-hand weapon. OTOH, with D&D's current weapon system, that's the only sensible way for someone using a bastard sword to fight. Samurai Jack and all the other samurai out there wielding their katana two-handed basically wasted a feat; they should just be using great swords.

The OA samurai is nice in an OA campaign where the main focus is on samurai and their interactions. Honestly, though, the OA samurai is nothing more than a fighter with a daisho, and most of his customizablity comes from the system of clans and clan-based feats presented in OA and the other Rokugan books.

The OA samurai doesn't really rely all that much upon the Rokugan clan content. I've used'em for a couple years now without it. His customizability just comes from having a decent list of bonus feats (even without clan feats) and decent skill options, both of which could've been transferred over to CW. And I think a lot of folks would rather have a class that's scary because he's a badass warrior, not scary because he has boogeyman powers layered on.

 

[Felon]

There is an EWP. 3 level PrC, Figher BAB and saves You can take it at 7th level at the earliest (BAB +6)

Each level gives you an Exotic weapon stunt such as:

Now this sounds like a cool PrC.

 

[Thistleknot]

Can you tell us what the new Spellsword is like?

I'm very much interested to see how much it changed from the version in Tome and Blood.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Out of curiousity, what are the other benefits of these feats (supposedly each has three manuevers)? And what are their prerequisities?

From the looks of things, elusive target may well provide sufficient reason for characters who don't want Spring Attack to take Dodge now. The Combat Brute feat removes most of the opportunity cost from sundering an opponent's weapon--with it's other benefits, it seems like a very good feat for a character who wants sundering to be a real option. Raptor School, OTOH, looks pretty useless (maybe useful for characters with Death Attack, for observing before initiating combat, or for characters with some kind of riposte ability but not very useful outside the corner cases of D&D) if the observation is all that you get. . . .

Tactical feats = you have to perform a string of actions to set up the feat

Examples (each feat has three manuevers):
2. Elusive Target -- Your Dodge opponent cannot get Power Attack bonus damage against you, but he still takes the to hit penalty.

3. Raptor School -- Spend one full round observing your foe. The next attack aginst the foe gains a +2 to attack and damage for every round you spend observing, upt to max of +6.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Nah, it was just a sarcastic response based on the supposed idea that anything in D&D is supposed to be historically accurate.

It should do what it sets out to do. A Samurai is really little more than a Japanese fighter. That is why the OA is a better model. It allows a person to make a TWF Samurai if they choose to do so or Two-handed fighting Samurai. The Samurai class leaves little room for customization so that you can play the Samurai archetype of your choice. There is a distinct difference between a historically accurate version a Samurai, and well-researched Samurai who fits into the various fictional literary and film archetypes.

I really didn't expect a historically accurate Samurai, just one that was customizable. This Samurai is limited and doesn't allow for a person to play a Samurai they might see in a film or read in a book.

I never saw you use the word "balance" at all. I saw you deride the class for not being historically accurate. None of the abilities of the CW samurai are "inappropriate." They're all quite appropriate for a certain type of samurai. The OA samurai is nice in an OA campaign where the main focus is on samurai and their interactions. Honestly, though, the OA samurai is nothing more than a fighter with a daisho, and most of his customizablity comes from the system of clans and clan-based feats presented in OA and the other Rokugan books. Since there wasn't room (or need) to completely reprint all those feats and whatnot, I think the CW Samurai makes a perfectly fine class for a more western-focused game.

No, not really. It make the Samurai into some superhero type able generate fear and fight with two swords straight out of some comic book.

The OA Samurai is a much better archetype and could be transferred just fine without clan feats. I know this, because I use it without clan feats in my own campaigns. It works fine in a fantasy setting as the Japanese equivalent of a knight.

I guess the CW Samurai sits well with folks who don't know much about the Samurai from a historical or fictional standpoint, unless the only Samurai you want to emulate is some whacked out version of Miyamato Musashi.

 

[Michael Tree]

[*]Flurry of Strikes: Like monk, except with double weapon or spiked chain only[/list]

If a high level monk/EWM has this ability, can he use his full flurry progression, or is this ability simply an extra attack for a -2 penalty?

 

[Michael Tree]

I'm a bit torn on the 2-weapon fighting. On the one hand, it's not appropriate to assume all samurai wield an off-hand weapon. OTOH, with D&D's current weapon system, that's the only sensible way for someone using a bastard sword to fight. Samurai Jack and all the other samurai out there wielding their katana two-handed basically wasted a feat; they should just be using great swords.

I would make more sense to me to replace the mandatory EWP(Katana) and TWF feats with several "fighting styles", like what was done with the ranger. That way a samurai could focus on fighting with one katana in both hands, daisho, or even bows.

Or you could just do what many many people will do: Ignore it and use the OA version.

 

[Wormwood]

I guess the CW Samurai sits well with folks who don't know much about the Samurai from a historical or fictional standpoint...

Or those of us who know about historical samurai, but don't care about emulating them in our D&D games.

 

[tburdett]

I guess the CW Samurai sits well with folks who don't know much about the Samurai from a historical or fictional standpoint, unless the only Samurai you want to emulate is some whacked out version of Miyamato Musashi.

Or people who realize that it is just a game.

 

[Nightingale 7]

Gfunk,in the Dervish example you gave the base attacks of the scimitars were 1d4.What gives?Did they lower the base damage,or was the sample character a halfling or a gnome,so they had the small version?Hehe,I can just picture it.The halfling Dervish standing short( ) in front of the rampaging orc horde!With blades spinning he dives into the orcs' front ranks.The only thing the bewildered human defenders of the land is orcs falling down left and right,clutching their bleeding slashed anckles,as if an invisible scythe has passed below them.