Tian Xia: Coming 2023–2024!

One other thing I'd like to point out is that making a class requires time, resources, and playtesting, and all that effort would be focused on providing options limited to just one region of Tian Xia. They wouldn't be able to work on other classes more people have been requesting during this time such as the inquisitor or shaman, they would have less people playtesting the samurai and ninja due to them not fitting well in most campaigns, and all this would be for options that really aren't that different from options we already have. Even the gunslinger and inventor are usable in significantly more areas than the samurai and ninja.

I mean, we're not going to see classes in lost omens books anyways, but I don't see why you think any new class would have to be region-locked or wouldn't function in most campaigns. The basic concepts people have suggested for a theoretical class aren't exactly hard coded to any type of campaign. Tbh it'd probably be more campaign flexible than the investigator.

Does not Tian Xia and/or Asian fantasy have people who...

-Work with chemical reagents to produce fantastical results
-Can get angry and become more powerful from it, to the point of supernatural ability
-Play music to the point of having magical powers
-Dedicate themselves in service of a divine entity or entities to gain magical abilities (x2)
-Commune with nature and animals to control the elements
-Fight
-Train in martial arts (jk nobody is surprised when Fantasy Asia: The Class is a viable concept in fantasy Asia, even if Paizo made Monk far more diverse of an option)
-Learn to stalk the wilderness and hunt
-Stab people in the back and have an eclectic skill set
-Have magical powers gifted to them by their supernatural bloodline
-Study the magic of ancient texts and scrolls

I mean, if when you picture a Champion you're exclusively imagining a knight in plate armour wielding a cruciform weapon in defence of their nation and their faith, of course that would look strange in Tian Xia, but the concept of a dedicated holy warrior doesn't exclusively look like a knight in plate. A samurai in o-yoroi who wields their katana in the name of the Empress of Heaven... that sounds like a cool character concept who has the spirituality and dedication to honour nailed and is 100% a viable Champion concept.

--

Addendum: I don't mean to stray too far into the camp of "New class concepts shouldn't exist because X or Y combination already exists and covers it well enough." Absolutely new class concepts should exist, even if it seems like another class can almost be 'good enough' as the so-oft-touted example of the Swashbuckler.

I'm just leery of taking one specific culture's warrior archetype character and calcifying everything that makes it distinct, or even 'exotic' from the familiar version of that same archetype and reducing it to those stereotypes of what that warrior must do. The swashbuckler is a stock character type of a daring, acrobatic warrior who fights with panache, not a specific...

I think bringing up Champion is a good example of why if we were to get a Ninja class it would be best to give it a more a generic name that can be applied to a different regions/settings because if Champions were called Paladins I feel conjures a much more strict image in someones head compared to Champion

I mean, we're not going to see classes in lost omens books anyways, but I don't see why you think any new class would have to be region-locked or wouldn't function in most campaigns. The basic concepts people have suggested for a theoretical class aren't exactly hard coded to any type of campaign. Tbh it'd probably be more campaign flexible than the investigator.

The basic mechanical concepts aren't limited to one specific region, but the flavor of a samurai or ninja added on top of that certainly is. Also if those concepts aren't actually limited to Japanese fantasy, then shouldn't we name them something more generic?

I mean, ideally a class should be flexible enough that it could describe someone of any ancestry hailing from anywhere on the planet. Like sure "Druid" refers to someone from ancient Celtic culture, but the whole "you are a wise person who is so in tune with nature you can draw power from it" also describes someone like Zhuge Liang.

I mean a Shaman class would be a very appropriate inclusion for a Tian Xia book, that wouldn't be out of place in Avistan or Arcadia (unlike a Ninja class).

that is the reason shaman should have been in core rulebook instead of druid

not reason samurai or ninja should be a class

it was the worst class idea of 1e

how does anyone ever think repeat this mistake in 2e are good idea

Squiggit wrote:

I mean, we're not going to see classes in lost omens books anyways, but I don't see why you think any new class would have to be region-locked or wouldn't function in most campaigns. The basic concepts people have suggested for a theoretical class aren't exactly hard coded to any type of campaign. Tbh it'd probably be more campaign flexible than the investigator.

The basic mechanical concepts aren't limited to one specific region, but the flavor of a samurai or ninja added on top of that certainly is. Also if those concepts aren't actually limited to Japanese fantasy, then shouldn't we name them something more generic?

One could ask the same thing of the monk class too, but it manages to work fine outside an oriental setting without being named 'martial artist' or 'punchy guy'.

monk should be named martial artist

monk weapon are mostly not monk weapon

monk stance are mostly martial art style

there is also very little stuff base on hakaiso stereotype common in all kind of entertainment media

CynDuck wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

I mean, we're not going to see classes in lost omens books anyways, but I don't see why you think any new class would have to be region-locked or wouldn't function in most campaigns. The basic concepts people have suggested for a theoretical class aren't exactly hard coded to any type of campaign. Tbh it'd probably be more campaign flexible than the investigator.

The basic mechanical concepts aren't limited to one specific region, but the flavor of a samurai or ninja added on top of that certainly is. Also if those concepts aren't actually limited to Japanese fantasy, then shouldn't we name them something more generic?

One could ask the same thing of the monk class too, but it manages to fork fine outside an oriental setting without being named 'martial artist' or 'punchy guy'.

Well I do see a lot of people complaining about the monk feeling thematically off-putting in traditional European fantasy settings already, I mean I found it really weird when I was first getting into D&D. The monk has the advantage of both being a part of the established tradition of fantasy classes and covering a wide variety of archetypes that can be found in many regions outside of Asia. I do honestly think the monk should get some tweaks to their name/theming, but at the same time I don't see why its exactly comparable to the ninja or samurai here.

I honestly kind of like the name "monk" because it helps set up the fun fantasy of "What if the Trappists got really into boxing instead of brewing."

Well I do see a lot of people complaining about the monk feeling thematically off-putting in traditional European fantasy settings already

I'd struggle to take them seriously, in a kitchen-sink setting that has robots, androids, laser guns, pyramids, mummies, ect. It being euro-centric went out the window a LONG time ago.

at the same time I don't see why its exactly comparable to the ninja or samurai here.

IMO, it's the ubiquitous of them in popular media. Even if you discount anime/manga/wuxia/manhwa/manhua/wushu, you see it in American comic, movies, ect in various time periods/settings [past, present, fantasy, cyber-punk, ect]. They have a bigger 'mental image' for most people than rogue or thief, and one that isn't limited to a particular fantasy. I think more people would expect a ninja in a fantasy setting than a gunslinger or an inventor with a robo-cat... samurai is a bit harder to see, but the wandering ronin is a classic.

As to just the name, well you have to pick one and everyone has an idea what they do without explanation: that in itself, is a good reason for it. If you use a generic name, you lose that. It's like the gunslinger, a name linked to the American Old West: you can make all kinds of characters with it, even ones that do not use guns, but know basically what it does from the name. 'Sneaky mystical guy' just doesn't come across the same as ninja.

Am I out of touch in that I don't see the Ninja as inherently magical? Like I've seen a lot of ninja movies and there's rarely anything more magical than "being as good as you are at your chosen art, you can do things that aren't actually possible" which is just standard fare in action movies.

Final Fantasy usually has Ninjas capable of magic and I think in some older Japanese stories Ninja can be described being capable of magic as well so magic definitely can be in their flavor

I mean sure a ninja *could* be magical, but in my youth there was a cartoon where Arthurian Knights could shoot lasers out of their swords and fly and summon dragons and stuff. If you made that a basic part of the kit of a "Knight" class, that would still be weird.

CynDuck wrote:

Well I do see a lot of people complaining about the monk feeling thematically off-putting in traditional European fantasy settings already

I'd struggle to take them seriously, in a kitchen-sink setting that has robots, androids, laser guns, pyramids, mummies, ect. It being euro-centric went out the window a LONG time ago.

CynDuck wrote:

at the same time I don't see why its exactly comparable to the ninja or samurai here.

IMO, it's the ubiquitous of them in popular media. Even if you discount anime/manga/wuxia/manhwa/manhua/wushu, you see it in American comic, movies, ect in various time periods/settings [past, present, fantasy, cyber-punk, ect]. They have a bigger 'mental image' for most people than rogue or thief, and one that isn't limited to a particular fantasy. I think more people would expect a ninja in a fantasy setting than a gunslinger or an inventor with a robo-cat... samurai is a bit harder to see, but the wandering ronin is a classic.

As to just the name, well you have to pick one and everyone has an idea what they do without explanation: that in itself, is a good reason for it. If you use a generic name, you lose that. It's like the gunslinger, a name linked to the American Old West: you can make all kinds of characters with it, even ones that do not use guns, but know basically what it does from the name. 'Sneaky mystical guy' just doesn't come across the same as ninja.

Traditional European was a poor description but I feel like you should've been able to tell what I meant, the Inner Sea is centered mainly around the Mediterranean and shaolin monks definitely feel a bit out of place in it. I'm also a little confused at you bringing up gunslingers, generic and boring are two different things, and gunslinger is a name that both sounds evocative and is pretty generic. It feels like you've been strawmanning with the alternate names you bring up in general, like of course I don't want them to name these classes "sneaky mystical guy" or "punchy guy," I'd want them to use names like the champion, wizard, or oracle that sound cool but aren't tied too much to a specific culture.

Am I out of touch in that I don't see the Ninja as inherently magical? Like I've seen a lot of ninja movies and there's rarely anything more magical than "being as good as you are at your chosen art, you can do things that aren't actually possible" which is just standard fare in action movies.

Anime/manga has that as a staple. Naruto, King of Nabari, Brave 10, ninja scroll, Flame of Recca, ect. Personally, I've seen more shows with magical 'techniques' than not by a pretty wide margin. To me, it'd be strange to see a ninja class without it. I mean, it's hard to see a puff of smoke only to see that ninja vanished and a log with the ninja's clothes on in its place as a normal maneuver but it's a ninja classic.

that is mislead and perfect distraction

Traditional European was a poor description but I feel like you should've been able to tell what I meant

I understood, but disagreed as the setting here isn't one that neatly fit what you are describing: you can literally play an android and fight a robot a cleric of isis, a big frog from Mwangi and a monkey from Vudrani, which to me throws out the entire idea. An android and robot seem more out of place than said shaolin monks.

I'm also a little confused at you bringing up gunslingers

It's making a point: google gunslinger and you'll see wild west images of old west gunslingers and articles about the same. As such, the name evokes that setting, the American old west and as such, would be as out of place in that European/Mediterranean setting as said shaolin monk.

It feels like you've been strawmanning with the alternate names

No one has suggested one, so I just made something up. I'm not putting any thought into it because I like the names as/is: If you have some that "sound cool but aren't tied too much to a specific culture" feel free to offer them up.

CynDuck wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

I mean, we're not going to see classes in lost omens books anyways, but I don't see why you think any new class would have to be region-locked or wouldn't function in most campaigns. The basic concepts people have suggested for a theoretical class aren't exactly hard coded to any type of campaign. Tbh it'd probably be more campaign flexible than the investigator.

The basic mechanical concepts aren't limited to one specific region, but the flavor of a samurai or ninja added on top of that certainly is. Also if those concepts aren't actually limited to Japanese fantasy, then shouldn't we name them something more generic?

One could ask the same thing of the monk class too, but it manages to fork fine outside an oriental setting without being named 'martial artist' or 'punchy guy'.

It helps that Irori, the archetypal Monk in many ways, is one of the core 20 gods. Whatever the similarities at first glance to a faux-early modern Europe, this is a setting where they've actually had several thousand years of contact with Vudra.

that is mislead and perfect distraction

And movement in an instant... I'll stand it as extraordinary: the kind of thing a monk would use a focus for, for instance.

I honestly kind of like the name "monk" because it helps set up the fun fantasy of "What if the Trappists got really into boxing instead of brewing."

In seriousness the way the monk class transcends specific cultural associations is as follows:

- Throughout all places and cultures there are groups of people who sequester themselves from ordinary life for mystical or spiritual reasons.

- These people have a lot of time on their hands, and as a result tend to dive deep on very particular areas of interest that people in less monastic settings don't spend much time thinking about.

- Living outside the support structures others enjoy, they have reasons to defend themselves, but don't have access to organized militaries or militias or their materiel. They do have access to farming implements and their own bodies.

- Invariably when a monastic order or individual discovers or invents something that's particularly effective or insightful, there arises a need or interest in teaching it to outsiders- i.e. Shaolin opens up a 36th chamber.

None of this is specific to a culture or a people or a place. It's just hard to imagine these same patterns recurring in a western setting because of the influence over the West of a particular monotheistic religion that preaches nonviolence. But fantasy assumes a broadly polytheistic society and it's honestly not that hard to imagine the ancient Greeks, Persians, Celts, Norse, etc. developing their own monastic orders and martial arts. So the "non-Asiatic monk" really shouldn't be a stretch.

CynDuck wrote:

Traditional European was a poor description but I feel like you should've been able to tell what I meant

I understood, but disagreed as the setting here isn't one that neatly fit what you are describing: you can literally play an android and fight a robot a cleric of isis, a big frog from Mwangi and a monkey from Vudrani, which to me throws out the entire idea. An android and robot seem more out of place than said shaolin monks.

CynDuck wrote:

I'm also a little confused at you bringing up gunslingers

It's making a point: google gunslinger and you'll see wild west images of old west gunslingers and articles about the same. As such, the name evokes that setting, the American old west and as such, would be as out of place in that European/Mediterranean setting as said shaolin monk.

CynDuck wrote:

It feels like you've been strawmanning with the alternate names

No one has suggested one, so I just made something up. I'm not putting any thought into it because I like the names as/is: If you have some that "sound cool but aren't tied too much to a specific culture" feel free to offer them up.

The android and robot are also both rare options, while the monk is common. They both do feel out of place in quite a few campaigns and therefore have limits put on their use. Also while the gunslinger may be tied to westerns the name just refers to a person who fights with guns, and I see it get used fairly often outside of a western context. I do have suggestions for alternate names for the monk, although none come to mind for the ninja, but I feel like bringing that up would cause this discussion to derail further into a debate over whether those names are thematically appropriate, and that's something pretty subjective.

To get back on track, what exactly do you see in a ninja or samurai that justifies it as a full class? People always bring up the swashbuckler, gunslinger, and investigator as reasons for bringing back classes like these, but it's important to remember that they've also turned a lot of classes like the vigilante and cavalier into archetypes or rolled ones like the spiritualist and arcanist into options for other classes (plus the samurai was originally a variant of the cavalier rather than the fighter). The concept of a sneaky mystical guy can be fulfilled already in Pathfinder through a lot of different options, and I still don't see anything justifying a samurai being different from a fighter, champion, etc.

In seriousness the way the monk class transcends specific cultural associations is as follows:

- Throughout all places and cultures there are groups of people who sequester themselves from ordinary life for mystical or spiritual reasons.

You might be overreaching a bit with that statement. Monasticism is common in religions, but not universal. Furthermore, monastic life is no guarantor of ample free time. Your point that monasteries, being somewhat isolated and filled with material goods making them ripe target for attacks is perhaps your strongest point.

Regardless, it's clear that the association between hand-to-hand warriors and monasticism is here to stay.

I honestly kind of like the name "monk" because it helps set up the fun fantasy of "What if the Trappists got really into boxing instead of brewing."

Or the Benedictines punching instead of illuminating!

CynDuck wrote:

Besides that, which classes do you think would feel out of place in Tian Xia? For me the only ones that come to mind are the druid and psychic, Pathfinder's classes are generic and customizable enough to fit in a lot of fantasy settings.

Psychics actually fit in decently well! The heart of psychic magical study on Golarion is Vudra, on the neighboring continent of Casmaron, which has a great deal of contact with Tian Xia. One imagines they're maybe one step less common than the typical Iroran monk, but not by much.

I bet Nagajor probably has some psychic talent via the aberrant Naga as well!

How do we know that Casmaron or Vudra has a great deal of contact (more than the Inner Sea region does? Less?) with Tian Xia?

Even Druids might have a place in Tian Xia. Not the classic Celtic druid, but perhaps Shinto or Taoist analogs.

Gunpowder was invented in China as most are probably aware. Golarian lore might be a bit different but gunslingers fit in with the setting fine with some minor adjustments. We might even get more guns in this book too I imagine.

Traditional European was a poor description but I feel like you should've been able to tell what I meant, the Inner Sea is centered mainly around the Mediterranean and shaolin monks definitely feel a bit out of place in it. I'm also a little confused at you bringing up gunslingers, generic and boring are two different things, and gunslinger is a name that both sounds evocative and is pretty generic. It feels like you've been strawmanning with the alternate names you bring up in general, like of course I don't want them to name these classes "sneaky mystical guy" or "punchy guy," I'd want them to use names like the champion, wizard, or oracle that sound cool but aren't tied too much to a specific culture.

The Inner Sea is an analog for the Mediterranean. Golarion is not Earth. I've often thought it is a mistake to make the geography of our fantasy worlds so similar to Earth's. I understand, I think, why Paizo (and other companies) choose to go that route. They want a familiar "hook". Familiarity is nice, but it leads to problems like what we're discussing here.

James Jacobs said, back around the time 2E came out, that they didn't want the massive proliferation of classes that were in 1E. The question is whether the classes that exist can be used to tell the stories people want to tell. I'm pretty sure that I can make a Samurai-analog with the existing Fighter class (and maybe Cavalier archetype). I'm pretty sure that I can make a Ninja-analog with the exist Rogue class and maybe Assassin archetype. Maybe I'm wrong. The question really though is to me "what does the lore say about these things?" If the lore says Samurai exist, then the ruleset should provide a way to tell a Samurai's story, whatever that may be.

How do we know that Casmaron or Vudra has a great deal of contact (more than the Inner Sea region does? Less?) with Tian Xia?

I don't remember a source but I have also understood that Casmaron & Tian Xia have a fair amount of contact with one another. At the very least, Goka, arguably the largest port city in Tian Xia, is a straight shot across a major seasonal trade route from Casmaron. Large merchant fleets are said to sail the Embaral Ocean at these seasonal openings.

I would also like to point toward the number of ancestries shared in common between the continents. The naga are said to have been created by a Vudran goddess, but the modern nation of Nagajor lies in Tian Xia, meanwhile a Tian naga goddess created the Nagaji. Vanara likewise are native to Vudra but can be found in notable numbers in the jungles of Tian Xia. Granted, these examples are somewhat circumstantial as recent 2e reveals have shown that some of these ancestries aren't as rare in Avistan as might have been once believed.

Hm. A chart showing intercontinental trade routes would be interesting -- as would an article on open ocean navigation.

what exactly do you see in a ninja or samurai that justifies it as a full class?

For ninja, IMO it's kind of like the magus: in this case a mash-up of rogue and monk-like focus powers [movement, stealth, clones, deversions, ect] + the weapon proficiencies and abilities. like magus, it could be cobbled together with various archetypes but there would still be elements missing. See the PF1 ninja for the kind of abilities they had there. I'd at least like a racket/class archetype if a full class isn't in the cards.

For samurai... I have no strong need for them personally: they used to be a subclass of cavalier, and those became an archetype so it's seem IMO a new archetype and/or new feats for cavalier would be fine.

keftiu wrote:

CynDuck wrote:

Besides that, which classes do you think would feel out of place in Tian Xia? For me the only ones that come to mind are the druid and psychic, Pathfinder's classes are generic and customizable enough to fit in a lot of fantasy settings.

Psychics actually fit in decently well! The heart of psychic magical study on Golarion is Vudra, on the neighboring continent of Casmaron, which has a great deal of contact with Tian Xia. One imagines they're maybe one step less common than the typical Iroran monk, but not by much.

I bet Nagajor probably has some psychic talent via the aberrant Naga as well!

How do we know that Casmaron or Vudra has a great deal of contact (more than the Inner Sea region does? Less?) with Tian Xia?

For one, Vudra's significantly closer to Tian Xia than it is to Avistan.

We also know from Guns & Gears that the two are pretty extensively linked with trade (that book obviously focused on gunpowder specifically), while Lost Omens: Impossible Lands tells us that the Nagaji as a people are spread across both Vudra and Tian Xia. 1e treated both the Vanaras and the Vishkanya as being from Tian Xia, while 2e has so far linked them to Vudra - there's every reason to believe they're found in both places. Iroran martial arts are a major part of life in the Tian nation of Quain, with that deity being Vudrani in life.

Samurai is pretty much covered under champion or Cavalier, "Ninja" as a mystic assassin type of thing might be good for a new rogue racket focused on Illusion and stealth over everything else.

CynDuck wrote:

what exactly do you see in a ninja or samurai that justifies it as a full class?

For ninja, IMO it's kind of like the magus: in this case a mash-up of rogue and monk-like focus powers [movement, stealth, clones, deversions, ect] + the weapon proficiencies and abilities. like magus, it could be cobbled together with various archetypes but there would still be elements missing. See the PF1 ninja for the kind of abilities they had there. I'd at least like a racket/class archetype if a full class isn't in the cards.

For samurai... I have no strong need for them personally: they used to be a subclass of cavalier, and those because an archetype so it's seem IMO a new archetype and/or new feats for cavalier would be fine.

A laughing shadow magus can get you all of that pretty easily, maybe with an archetype to lean more into the stealth side of things.

I honestly think the Monk is a perfect chassis for any Ninja I could imagine. Maybe give them some sneakier Focus Spells?

graystone wrote:

CynDuck wrote:

what exactly do you see in a ninja or samurai that justifies it as a full class?

For ninja, IMO it's kind of like the magus: in this case a mash-up of rogue and monk-like focus powers [movement, stealth, clones, deversions, ect] + the weapon proficiencies and abilities. like magus, it could be cobbled together with various archetypes but there would still be elements missing. See the PF1 ninja for the kind of abilities they had there. I'd at least like a racket/class archetype if a full class isn't in the cards.

For samurai... I have no strong need for them personally: they used to be a subclass of cavalier, and those because an archetype so it's seem IMO a new archetype and/or new feats for cavalier would be fine.

A laughing shadow magus can get you all of that pretty easily, maybe with an archetype to lean more into the stealth side of things.

Hard disagree there: Spellstrike as the main mechanic isn't really a match and getting the bonus speed after casting... That's like telling me I can play a magus by playing a fighter with some archetypes and I'm looking for a spellstrike mechanic.

I suppose it depends on what one means with ninja Deadly Martial Artist,Mystic Assassin, or even peasant folk hero.

I honestly think the Monk is a perfect chassis for any Ninja I could imagine. Maybe give them some sneakier Focus Spells?

A much better starting point than a magus for sure. Sneakier Focus Spells and some feat support like a Ninja Weaponry feat for some non-monk weapons that are thematic would be a start.

CynDuck wrote:

graystone wrote:

CynDuck wrote:

what exactly do you see in a ninja or samurai that justifies it as a full class?

For ninja, IMO it's kind of like the magus: in this case a mash-up of rogue and monk-like focus powers [movement, stealth, clones, deversions, ect] + the weapon proficiencies and abilities. like magus, it could be cobbled together with various archetypes but there would still be elements missing. See the PF1 ninja for the kind of abilities they had there. I'd at least like a racket/class archetype if a full class isn't in the cards.

For samurai... I have no strong need for them personally: they used to be a subclass of cavalier, and those because an archetype so it's seem IMO a new archetype and/or new feats for cavalier would be fine.

A laughing shadow magus can get you all of that pretty easily, maybe with an archetype to lean more into the stealth side of things.

Hard disagree there: Spellstrike as the main mechanic isn't really a match and getting the bonus speed after casting... That's like telling me I can play a magus by playing a fighter with some archetypes and I'm looking for a spellstrike mechanic.

I mean there's dimensional assault in addition to the speed boost, also spellstrike feels pretty fitting with the magical ninja fantasy to me as a power attack.

I guess even if you still dislike that, a lot of the things you've listed are pretty easy to get in general. Rogues, thaumaturges, and swashbucklers all come to mind as having solid options to build a ninja off of, I really doubt it would be as complicated to make as you claim.

This might sound a bit out there but I kind of like the idea of Thaumaturge as a base for the Ninja like hard to explain but I like the fact they get a familiar and also feats for crafting scrolls/talismans actually fits my idea for a more mystic/magic ninja style of play as opposed to spell slots

I mean there's dimensional assault in addition to the speed boost, also spellstrike feels pretty fitting with the magical ninja fantasy to me as a power attack.

Yeah, no. I mean, if that works for you, great, but I'm nonplussed at the suggestion.

Rogues, thaumaturges, and swashbucklers all come to mind as having solid options to build a ninja off

Again, you can Frankenstein and coble something kind of, sort of looking like one if out squint but I'd like something that works out of the box is possible.

ONE thing I will admit about a more historically-minded ninja (i.e. low on the scale of flashy magical abilities a la FFXIV/Naruto) which I feel the currently published Rogue falls short of performing is the Rogue's arbitrary proficiency in rapiers and short swords. Surely wakizashi, kama, tekko-kagi, and sai are not any stranger weapons for a Rogue to wield than a rapier, but some of which are necessary to a classic ninja fantasy.

I think that new classes in Lost Omens books are high unlikely based on precedent. I think archetypes are the more likely solution to give a cultural flavor to (multiple) classes.

Also most classes are (to me) generic enough culturally to allow them to be placed in different settings.

Anyway we’ll see how it works out - I trust Paizo on this one.

I would like some source showing what is common vs. uncommon in a setting though. And perhaps we do need something that tailors starting weapon proficiencies for rogue and wizard (but that is more because the “named” weapon list approach was poorly future proofed from the start…..)

This might sound a bit out there but I kind of like the idea of Thaumaturge as a base for the Ninja like hard to explain but I like the fact they get a familiar and also feats for crafting scrolls/talismans actually fits my idea for a more mystic/magic ninja style of play as opposed to spell slots

Funny thing about the thaumaturge as a base for a ninja is that the thaum is already by far the best class to use shurikens with.

Pieces-Kai wrote:

This might sound a bit out there but I kind of like the idea of Thaumaturge as a base for the Ninja like hard to explain but I like the fact they get a familiar and also feats for crafting scrolls/talismans actually fits my idea for a more mystic/magic ninja style of play as opposed to spell slots

Funny thing about the thaumaturge as a base for a ninja is that the thaum is already by far the best class to use shurikens with.

The first thing I thought of when reading the Thaumaturge was "man, the Mirror Implement feels like some ninja stuff."

Rogues, thaumaturges, and swashbucklers all come to mind as having solid options to build a ninja off of, I really doubt it would be as complicated to make as you claim.

I wanted to circle back to this as I didn't have time before to get into it.

Rogues: Sibelius Eos Owm hit on one issue, the proficiencies: they can't even throw a ninja star [shuriken]! Second, while they fill the skill part just fine, they lack any focus powers or movement abilities which makes for a lackluster ninja IMO. It's the flipside with monks, where they they have the focus spells and movement abilities but lack some basic skills type abilities [nothing poison, trap, ect].

swashbucklers: about the exact opposite of a ninja: they want to be seen and do so with "spectacular flair"! You are dancing, bantering, taunting, performing, tumbling and fencing: a "state of flair is called panache". This is antithetical to a ninja IMO. With everything basically tied to and powered by jumping up and down yelling 'here I am, look at me!', this goes to the bottom of the barrel for me.

thaumaturges: Not feeling this one either: lacks the movement type abilities, the skill ability areas AND focus spells [mirror is something but the only one that could fit]. That and I don't see a ninja needing to roll for a lore check to work. Now for an Onmyouji or fulu pai it fits the bill well.

For me I feel Rogues, Monks, Alchemists and Thaumaturges all have parts that capture certain aspects of the Ninja class fantasy so I'd probably ultimately like them to take the parts of those classes I think fit the fantasy best and put them around a strong core for the class

Ya know, if we ever got shuriken improving archetype, it better be fricking accurate to how they are supposed to be used.

Mostly that shurikens are kinda like caltrops, you are supposed to throw them at enemy while you are escaping :p

Gunpowder was invented in China as most are probably aware. Golarian lore might be a bit different but gunslingers fit in with the setting fine with some minor adjustments. We might even get more guns in this book too I imagine.

Yes the current firearms access already includes Tian Xia:

Access The following regions have access to firearms: Alkenstar, Dongun Hold, Tian Xia, Vudra, Arcadia, Ustalav, the Shackles

Ps.: It's fun that's how looks like the Inner Sea is the main place where firearms are uncommon.

CynDuck wrote:

Traditional European was a poor description but I feel like you should've been able to tell what I meant, the Inner Sea is centered mainly around the Mediterranean and shaolin monks definitely feel a bit out of place in it. I'm also a little confused at you bringing up gunslingers, generic and boring are two different things, and gunslinger is a name that both sounds evocative and is pretty generic. It feels like you've been strawmanning with the alternate names you bring up in general, like of course I don't want them to name these classes "sneaky mystical guy" or "punchy guy," I'd want them to use names like the champion, wizard, or oracle that sound cool but aren't tied too much to a specific culture.

The Inner Sea is an analog for the Mediterranean. Golarion is not Earth. I've often thought it is a mistake to make the geography of our fantasy worlds so similar to Earth's. I understand, I think, why Paizo (and other companies) choose to go that route. They want a familiar "hook". Familiarity is nice, but it leads to problems like what we're discussing here.

James Jacobs said, back around the time 2E came out, that they didn't want the massive proliferation of classes that were in 1E. The question is whether the classes that exist can be used to tell the stories people want to tell. I'm pretty sure that I can make a Samurai-analog with the existing Fighter class (and maybe Cavalier archetype). I'm pretty sure that I can make a Ninja-analog with the exist Rogue class and maybe Assassin archetype. Maybe I'm wrong. The question really though is to me "what does the lore say about these things?" If the lore says Samurai exist, then the ruleset should provide a way to tell a Samurai's story, whatever that may be.

Samurai is pretty much covered under champion or Cavalier, "Ninja" as a mystic assassin type of thing might be good for a new rogue racket focused on Illusion and stealth over everything else.

CynDuck wrote:

what exactly do you see in a ninja or samurai that justifies it as a full class?

For ninja, IMO it's kind of like the magus: in this case a mash-up of rogue and monk-like focus powers [movement, stealth, clones, deversions, ect] + the weapon proficiencies and abilities. like magus, it could be cobbled together with various archetypes but there would still be elements missing. See the PF1 ninja for the kind of abilities they had there. I'd at least like a racket/class archetype if a full class isn't in the cards.

For samurai... I have no strong need for them personally: they used to be a subclass of cavalier, and those became an archetype so it's seem IMO a new archetype and/or new feats for cavalier would be fine.

I honestly think the Monk is a perfect chassis for any Ninja I could imagine. Maybe give them some sneakier Focus Spells?

These multiple different merge of view points that make I defend that they deserve a dedicated class.

Fighter is more closer to Samurai concept but not because it fits it but because the class flexibility allows it to fit any martial concept. Going in this concept it fits every other martial class just using archetypes but always we have some conceptual things out of place.
This way a fighter with barbarian dedication could be called as barbarian because the archetype give the char the rage abilities yet being able to use heavy armor and shields don't fit well the barbarian concept.
A fighter with a champion dedication would be champion once you get the most mystical and protection abilities from champions.
A fighter with a bow or 2 weapons + survival skill could be a ranger (you can also take Beastmaster archetype to complete the concept).
Yet the designers preferred to keep these as classes instead of just archetypes because a full class fits better the concept.

A champion and a chavalier falls into similar situation. Use a champion with a weapon ally to represent the "sword spirit" could be interesting but the tenets don't fit well the Samurai concept and chavalier concept is too much mount based concept for a classic fantasy samurai concept.

A monk as base for a samurai could be interesting due ki spells and for the concept of unarmored samurais. Yet have only no armor limitation also doesn't fit many other samurais concept as well.

The same for Ninjas, a rogue can take the main concept of a Ninja but lacks in weapons proficiency, in scrolls and other mystical ninja abilities like ki (or chakra as is more know by naruto based pop culture) while the monk may meets the martial arts style but also lacks access to some weapons a no scroll based abilities while thaumaturge have access to scrolls but it's concept don't fits well into sneaky ninja abilities.

I don't know what generic name to use but I still think that a so cultural distinct region as Tian Xia deserve some more cultural based classes (and not only Tian Xia, other regions too).

I know this probably won't happen in a Lost Omens book but maybe a new rule book addressing this and other things like an Ultimate Combat or ACG could be interesting.

those are some really weird idea of ninja

ninja are spy saboteur sapper

very fitting for investigator

among famous azuchi momoyama ninja only remember one of them famous for assassination

Ya know, if we ever got shuriken improving archetype, it better be fricking accurate to how they are supposed to be used.

Mostly that shurikens are kinda like caltrops, you are supposed to throw them at enemy while you are escaping :p

How would you recommend representing that mechanically?