TardyClock
First Post
In my very short time in the D&D community I have come across a few attempt to port the Samurai Class into D&D 4th Edition, a noble cause to be sure and one that I would no doubt have attempted if it weren't for someone on another forum. Said person pointed out that making it a theme would probably be a better idea.
So, the Samurai shall be a Theme rather than its own seperate class but there's a new problem here. What distinguishes a Samurai from a Fighter? Samurai weren't all that different from most other martial fighters and 99% of what makes a Samurai is flavour. I mean surely a Two-handed Weapon Style Fighter with a Bastard Sword is as much a Samurai as anything else? Let's narrow the focus a little bit then shall we? After looking at the Samurai one thing in particular caught my eye, a fighting style that is, if not unique to them then is at least unique in D&D. That is Iaijutsu (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaijutsu)
Okay by this point you're probably just screaming at me to get to the point so here's the basic premise. A reactionary fighter build that functions primarily around Immediate Reactions and Immediate Interrupts. "But wait!" I hear you shout in distress, "That would be broken beyond words! Being able to do consistent damage on the enemy's turn whilst still being able to attack on your own turn would out-damage the strikers," and I must say that this was the first problem I faced with the concept. I have a number of possible solutions to this.
- Powers will function like the "Guarded Attack" Rogue Encounter Power where the user makes the action on their turn and then attacks if the power is triggered by an enemy on the enemy's turn.
- Stance based powers that require a standard action to maintain
What are your thoughts on this? I plan on them being Psionic based as to explain the super-human reaction speed and because Psionics also incorporate Ki (Which fits the eastern theme).
So, the Samurai shall be a Theme rather than its own seperate class but there's a new problem here. What distinguishes a Samurai from a Fighter? Samurai weren't all that different from most other martial fighters and 99% of what makes a Samurai is flavour. I mean surely a Two-handed Weapon Style Fighter with a Bastard Sword is as much a Samurai as anything else? Let's narrow the focus a little bit then shall we? After looking at the Samurai one thing in particular caught my eye, a fighting style that is, if not unique to them then is at least unique in D&D. That is Iaijutsu (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaijutsu)
Okay by this point you're probably just screaming at me to get to the point so here's the basic premise. A reactionary fighter build that functions primarily around Immediate Reactions and Immediate Interrupts. "But wait!" I hear you shout in distress, "That would be broken beyond words! Being able to do consistent damage on the enemy's turn whilst still being able to attack on your own turn would out-damage the strikers," and I must say that this was the first problem I faced with the concept. I have a number of possible solutions to this.
- Powers will function like the "Guarded Attack" Rogue Encounter Power where the user makes the action on their turn and then attacks if the power is triggered by an enemy on the enemy's turn.
- Stance based powers that require a standard action to maintain
What are your thoughts on this? I plan on them being Psionic based as to explain the super-human reaction speed and because Psionics also incorporate Ki (Which fits the eastern theme).
