Ultimate Combat Playtest: Gunslinger, Ninja, Samurai

[gamerprinter]

It is on historical record that hand to hand fighting was an important part of training for the ninja and swordsmanship for the samurai. Failing to incorporate that element into both classes is moving away from Pathfinder closer adherence to simulation versus balance for class design. I don't care for it.

Get the ninja right, Paizo. For the love of the gaming gods, get the ninja right.

The question begs to be asked, in which slice of the historical record are you speaking. Samurai were epitomized with different weapons and tactics for different periods of time. If you're Japan adventure simulates the Edo Period (1600 - 1868) then yeah, swordmastery was a very important aspect to what is the samurai.

However, before 1600, especially 1200 to 1500, samurai is epitomized as the quintessential mounted archer. Katana was a secondary weapon only. Once you ran out of arrows or dropped your bow, that would be the only time your katana is unsheathed in combat.

The historic record is large and differentiated between one part from another. So no, one weapon is essentially samurai throughout the entire historic record.

Regarding the historic ninja - I can easily point to differing authorities on ninja that suggest their information is correct, yet completely opposite to one another. So which is correct? Both and neither. Ninja have always been a secret organization, so what martial arts schools call ninjutsu today, may or may not have any relationship to how the real ninja was, as there is no one resource to tell us for certain what is a real ninja. There is no definite ninja of history described in such detail that a specific class build could be attributed.

So which resources on anything make a ninja or samurai correct to you, may be incorrect or completely different that other sources. Only thing I can say for certain is that you nor I have the exact truth historically.

So claiming Paizo or anyone else is not fitting history - is only a blind guess by you and is just as likely a complete fiction. How one movie depicted a samurai or ninja is no kind of authority at all.

You have an empty argument, IMO.

 

[pawsplay]

Female samurai traditionally used the naginata.

During many periods, the wakizashi, often constructed with a more rugged design than the katana, was often the main batle sword. Due to its special tempering, the classic katana was very sharp but also relatively brittle as a parrying weapon, and at around 36" could be considered a little long for close quarters fighting. During the older periods, samurai transitioned first from the Chinese-style straight sword to the Mongolian curved sword, which became the tachi, and then from the tachi to the distinctive compromise-curved katana.

Samurai were associated with the spear for many parts of history. During the high period of the samurai, with iajitsu and tea ceremonies and seppuku and all that stuff, they were early adopters of firearms as well.

Ninja probably were regularly trained in the martial arts, but not in the sense of going toe to toe with armed opponents. Tai-jitsu was a part of samurai training and undoubtedly extended to their assassins. However, there is reason to suspect that many "ninja" were cultural outsiders adopted into or hired by samurai clans. The classic ninja assassination tend to take the form of a particularly cruel practical joke. For instance, several samurai were killed by ninja hiding in the outhouse with a spear or by a bomb planted there. Sniping a samurai with a gun or bow while he went out at night to use the outhouse was another good one. They also placed wires along forest paths, poisoned food, and infiltrated households with assassins using daggers or strangulation. None of that particularly requires Improved Unarmed Strike, much less flurry of blows.

 

[gamerprinter]

While not necessarily the definitive source on samurai and ninja, Samurai-archives.com is considered by many in historical circles as the best online resource for the samurai - I use it regularly to confer on samurai questions.

Claimed in the Forum, but its site administrator is the consideration that ninja weren't outsiders, lower caste members of Japanese society, rather a different specialist samurai, on equal political level as any samurai. They weren't hired by samurai house, they were samurai houses.

The Samurai Archives Citadel // View topic - Some misconceptions about the Samurai

Of course Wikipedia will relay the complete opposite information regarding the origins of ninja. Best answer, nobody knows for sure. But I do consider samurai-archives as a much better historical resource than many others.

 

[pawsplay]

Adoption was a huge part of the Japanese social order. Obviously there is no definitive way to know but I would probably say that the powerful groups of ninja were samurai clans, or households within samurai clans, but that they also acquired household members from the outsider segments of society. The ninja may have been active in the late 19th century, but since they were almost certainly extinct by WWII, it's really impossible to know a lot of details about their activities.

 

[gamerprinter]

Oh, certainly adoption which was exercised constantly throughout Japanese history, makes the idea of bloodlines a very muddy situation. Adoption was a political practice, even considering the Tokugawa Ieyasu required Minamoto blood to be considered shogun, so the emperor adopted Ieyasu, so the claim could be true.

Besides, much history is written by the victors in a war, so accuracy is out the window for that, or history is written hundreds after the fact, so no kind of accuracy relied on. My previous posts confirm my belief in that.

When talking about non-Japanese members in Japanese society after Heian Period (700 - 1185), such as Koreans and Chinese, most fell into the Hinin (eta) 'tainted' caste and not as true members of Japanese society. The only organization that regularly accepts non-Japanese is the Yakuza, and that's an organization of the Hinin caste only.

Really the last time Chinese/Korean immigrants were allowed in Japanese society was prior to 700 AD, and as the possible original Japanese having arrived from the continent prior to 400 AD.

The idea of non-Buddhist monks who were non-Japanese to be accepted into Japanese society at all, after the founding years is only the yakuza, not as adopted members in samurai clans and certainly not the noble caste. I have to completely disagree with you on that point (I could be wrong, but my sources say otherwise.)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Hmmm, I need to modify my stance a bit - it did not occur to me that maybe the more off the wall or niche classes might need playtesting more, and that the whole point of putting them up is to test them. If there was an eye roll smiley here then I would be rolling them at myself.

The Auld Grump, oy!

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I would say that is an uncharitable way of looking at it, but not without a glimmer of truth. Guns in the oldest RPG are a difficult nut to crack. They need to be different but not overpowering. They need to feel right. With the gun rules and the gunslinger we are attempting to achieve those very important design goals.

Another design goal is that guns in Golarion are rare and expensive. That's part of the world’s story.

What you are seeing now in the playtest is a partial and targeted design. I had specific questions I need to have answers for about the gunslinger. The structure of the current class was designed to give me those answers, and give a taste of what they’ll see in the final book.

Yes, the playtest serves a lot of masters…that’s the nature of playtest. The class needs work; that is why we have a playtest. Problems come to light, and they get fixed thanks to the dedication of the fans and the many folks working on the product.

Just add to the feedback, and wait for the final result. I think you’ll be much happier with it than you are with the current iteration.

I've already been posting extensivrly on the gunslinger discussion board, along with a m-m-m-megathread on the class and another thread on the weapons themselves.

I just, you know, didn't do it here

In both threads I presented my own questions regarding both class and weapons, for what it's worth.

 

[Celtavian]

re

The question begs to be asked, in which slice of the historical record are you speaking. Samurai were epitomized with different weapons and tactics for different periods of time. If you're Japan adventure simulates the Edo Period (1600 - 1868) then yeah, swordmastery was a very important aspect to what is the samurai.

However, before 1600, especially 1200 to 1500, samurai is epitomized as the quintessential mounted archer. Katana was a secondary weapon only. Once you ran out of arrows or dropped your bow, that would be the only time your katana is unsheathed in combat.

The historic record is large and differentiated between one part from another. So no, one weapon is essentially samurai throughout the entire historic record.

Regarding the historic ninja - I can easily point to differing authorities on ninja that suggest their information is correct, yet completely opposite to one another. So which is correct? Both and neither. Ninja have always been a secret organization, so what martial arts schools call ninjutsu today, may or may not have any relationship to how the real ninja was, as there is no one resource to tell us for certain what is a real ninja. There is no definite ninja of history described in such detail that a specific class build could be attributed.

So which resources on anything make a ninja or samurai correct to you, may be incorrect or completely different that other sources. Only thing I can say for certain is that you nor I have the exact truth historically.

So claiming Paizo or anyone else is not fitting history - is only a blind guess by you and is just as likely a complete fiction. How one movie depicted a samurai or ninja is no kind of authority at all.

You have an empty argument, IMO.

You are getting way too detailed. Your response is without merit when it comes to game design. It's like arguing that Full Plate armor should be excluded as an option in the game because it came hundreds of years after the development of chain armor and wasn't available to warriors throughout most of the period when swords, shields, and armor were in primary use. It wasn't the armor of the unmounted soldier ever. We're not getting that detailed.

We're talking simple historical truth here all wrapped up into what ninja and samurai lovers enjoy. Those of us that will use the class if designed properly. And it is on historical record that ninja did practice martial arts, usually varying by clan. The real ninja were rumored to be anything from dishonored samurai clans to Chinese clans that had to run from China to clans specifically sanctioned by the varying powers that ruled over Japan to perform less than honorable actions on behalf of the emperor or shogun.

And I included both swordsmanship and archery in the samurai.

When you're designing a game, you go with the ideas in the history of an archetype that people enjoy. Such as Full Plate armor for knights. Greatswords or Greataxes for barbarians. Katanas and bows for samurai, Martial arts for the ninja.

I didn't go into distinct historical detail not because I was unaware, but because I'm trying to go by the basic history of the ninja.

Amazing that you could somehow state the argument was "empty" without bothering to think about what game design does.

So is Pathfinder['s game design empty because they decided to include armor technology that most likely wouldn't work as it does?

I don't think so.

And as I stated before, your attempt to support any decision by Paizo to not incorporate martial arts into the ninja archetype shows you don't have much love for the ninja. If you did, you would want martial arts as part of the archetype. I enjoy the ninja. I would play an Asian flavored campaign such as the Jade Regent coming up. So would my players.

But none of my players would play a ninja without martial arts as part of the class and swordsmanship as part of the samurai class. It is what is best known about both archetypes.

 

[gamerprinter]

I may be way too detailed, but you're way to general.

I'm not designing the samurai for everybody's game, I'm designing one specifically for Kaidan only.

Honestly, I'm publishing a Japan inspired fantasy setting called Kaidan. I am definitely not interested in guns or a 'time of peace' in my Japan analog, so a samurai designed like 1600 onward samurai is too modern for my needs. I'm going for a more feudal period design. The Portuguese don't show up in my analog, so no guns available.

This means my samurai emulates 12th century samurai - 'the way of the horse and bow'. In this earlier time, more people believed in ghosts and goblins, so it fits better with a fantasy setting.

Paizo's samurai class is similar to one of my samurai designs (in Kaidan, Samurai is a caste of many classes, not just one class.) They've got optional bow or sword specialty, which in my mind is correct. Your assumption that it can only the 'way of the sword' is wrong historically and too limited for viability in a game setting.

Your post mentioned 'Samurai should be a sword master' or something like that. Its only that, that I disagree. Now you say both 'sword and archery' in your last post. Had you included that in your previous post, I wouldn't have responded as I did. But you did not, which suggested to me a misconception on your part - which I was correcting.

I posted a link in my response to PawsPlay in this thread that points Samurai-Archives.com (number one source for authentic samurai info) which suggests ninja were 'honorable' full status samurai houses. Traditional samurai filled the role as battlefield warriors. Ninja are only covert ops versions of standard samurai. There is nothing dishonorable or criminal about them - that's a misconception based on post Tokugawa Era samurai and the media. Ninja was a full status samurai, not a fallen samurai. (Incidentally, I learned this long ago, samurai-archives only confirms this.)

Me, I'm going for a specific era in a feudal Japan setting, not a general one, and the whole setting is wrapped in authenticity - not just the character classes. The setting has lots of verisimilitude and better for it. I don't want some general old Japan tropes (many of which are wrong BTW). I'm trying to re-educate my fans on what makes a more authentic Japan enviroment. To do otherwise seems lazy to me.

Granted others might want a more over-the-top, or trope following version of a Japan game. Somebody else will have to create that game, I'm building a horror setting that is in keeping with Japanese concepts, history, religion, legend and folklore. Its not based on anime, James Clavell, Rokugan, or anybody else's fantasy job. Mine is based on 16th century and earlier ideas of what is Japan, in a Japan analog that frees me from actual history.

Good design is my only goal with samurai and my other classes, basing it on real Japan and not misconceptions of Japan.


My setting has for Samurai: Hatamoto (cavalier archetype - similar to Paizo's Samurai), Meika (courtier bard archetype), Onmyoji (wizard archetype) and Yojimbo (ranger archetype.) However my setting isn't intended to be a samurai-centric game, rather focusing on all the social castes. So the Commoner caste classes include: Bakushi (bard), Budoka (monk), Heimin Bushi (fighter), Jugondo (sorcerer), Kannushi (cleric) Matagi (ranger), Miko (oracle) Metsuki (inquisitor 'secret police), Shinobi (bard, monk, ranger, sorcerer archetypes and a prestige class ninja), Sohei (fighter-monk archetype), and Yamabushi (paladin).

The setting also features an Animal caste mostly kappa, tengu, henge classes which include druids as well.

Hinin (eta) caste: Bakushi (bard) and Yakuza subculture (bard, fighter, monk and rogue archetypes.)

So using all the classes of Pathfinder, and several versions of some, based on how they best fit their social niche.

I was never satisfied by Kara-tur, Oriental Adventures nor Rokugan - Kaidan intends to be the fix for all that.

GP

PS: its also because you brought up the words "in the historic record", that there is even a dispute. Had you said Japanese tropes for a fantasy game, that would be completely different and cover a wide assortment of best fit ideas.

 

[BobROE]

Your response is without merit when it comes to game design.

I'd argue that your's is as well. You're making the assumption that what you want out of a ninja class (and by proxy the game as a whole) is what everyone else wants out of the ninja. This isn't true.

I don't care one way or the other if the ninja has martial arts skills (where martial arts is weapon free combat), so it looks fine to me. Perhaps that means I don't care about the ninja, but paizo has to design a class for all people not just those who love ninjas and everything about them.

There are some people who obviously would want a more historically accurate take on the class and I've seen posts on the Paizo boards saying they want a ninja that's based on a power source coming from demons. So there's obviously a wide range of possibilities.