Complete Warrior Samurai Thread

Remathilis said:
Really? I thought that they could use their daishido without penalty. Of course,

Nope. He's not even required to be prof. with the Wakizashi. His primary focus was the Katana & Daikyu.

FWIW Everything else you mentioned was pretty much spot on.

I have known to be wrong... from time to time...

LOL
 

log in or register to remove this ad

"Is the CW Samurai core class 'historically accurate'?"

Well, it is inspired by one prominent legendary swordsman, the creator of niten ryu, Musashi Miyamoto.

Or in splatbook-speak, it's a combination of master samurai and tempest prestige class, with emphasis on the tempest portion.

But honestly, that is only one fighting style of the samurai. IMHO, they made that core class way too specific. Of course, one can argue that he still have the feat allotment at 1st, 3rd, and three levels thereafter to customize the class, but still, the niten ryu fighting style is the core of this class' ability, and historically, it's not one of the oldest Japanese swordfighting arts.

1e Samurai represent the archetypal Japanese buke warrior class. He must not only learn swordfighting, although that is the first weapon a samurai should be proficient with, but also must learn archery and spearfighting. There are those in the buke class that are well-known for their spearfighting techniques in battle rather than their sword of status.

If it were me, I steal the combat path example from the ranger class and emphasize the katana swordfighting, the yumi archery, and the yari spearfighting. Of course, if I were to steal from d20 Modern, I set them up as talent trees.
 

hmm

first off, no offence meant to anybody. ok now that's outta the way...

as we Singaporeans would say it..

"aiyah! why this make you so stress?"

translated into a more, erm, standard-issue form of English, what i meant was "hmm! why are you so stressed and put out over this?"

of course, something's lost in the translation.

as are all things when they are translated.

but a translation is also an interpretation, and a new one at that. what's my point? the CW samurai makes a good niten type, reminds me of Musashi from the Eiji Yoshikawa novels, where he was written as being a hell of an intimidating fellow at first, but later becomes very personable and charismatic (heck, in the last few chapters, Musashi goes around teaching kids how to read and write). it's also got a lot of "authenticity" in the sense that it's inspired a little by the Book of Five Rings (not L5R) - go read the Book of Fire, i think - there's somehting about catching your opponent's gaze as you clash blades with him and to reproach him, to make your spirit-glare go "tut-tut!" to cow him into submission. Still, i think they should get good will saves - but hey that's just me.

anyhow, if you don't like the emphasis on niten-style and intimidation, just look at this as a possible permutation of a possible samurai school or clan. Maybe you have other samurai types as well. I think the CW classes like Hexblade and Samurai just show what can be done with a 20-level base class that focuses on melee, with a unique paradigm and some specialities like the ranger and paladin that already exist in the PHB. Make a Iaijitsu-type, using the existing CW one as a prototype of comparison. Make a Glaive-type, anything.

i agree with somebody - sorry can't remember who exactly - who said earlier that the ranger and paladin are just as narrowly defined. it's nearly impossible to make anything that's "historically accurate" because history, or our accounts of it, tend to be rather inaccurate in the first place - you can cite something as being accurate, and you'll have ten thousand people disagreeing with you.

let the class inspire, not confine - your mileage may vary, in all the infinite multitudes of games that you all will play. me, i like Niten, so my perspective is skewed, but hey that's just my little fraction of infinity haha. ymmv. :-P

yours,
shao
 


Shazman said:
Yeah, I think you're thinking of the 1e kensai.

(Scratches head)

No, I don't think so. I don't have my books here, but I recall the kensai being good with one weapon. Two weapon fighting wasn't a proficiency in 1e. It was an option anyone could use, but you were better at if you had a high dex.
 

Psion said:
(Scratches head)

No, I don't think so. I don't have my books here, but I recall the kensai being good with one weapon. Two weapon fighting wasn't a proficiency in 1e. It was an option anyone could use, but you were better at if you had a high dex.

I'll have to double-check my 1e OA as well, but I'm pretty sure that it was one of the kensai's abilities. It wasn't the main focus of the class, but I think they got it around mid-level.
 

Remove ads

Top