Sethos's page

Frankly, it looks like you're trying to screw with the system inorder to get reach and dual-weild for a DPS fighter

Actually, it looks to me like he's trying to recreate Hilde from Soul Calibur 4

Personally, I don't care too much one way or another as long as the end result is flexible enough to accommodate all kinds of samurai. And I think the variant class can pull that off. If they can do a new class without too much stress and effort, though, I'd be for that, too.

Maybe something along the lines of what is suggested at the end of the OP in this thread then?

Anything you're looking for in particular, as far as snipers go?

At the time... no, it was more a vague feeling of pistoleer gunslingers got cool, flashy stuff what about snipers? After having sometime to actually think about it, common sense kicked in. Snipers don't get cool, flashy stuff cause its not a cool, flashy way to kill things (possible exception of the Called shots).

The only thing I came up with during the day was something along the lines of a mild Death attack like from the Assassin PrC

[Unnamed]
The Gunslinger knows that patience is a virtue and the biggest payoff in this profession. She takes her time waiting for the perfect moment to fire an incredibly lethal shot.
The Gunslinger spends at least one round studying her target before making an attack roll. If the attack hits, then for each round that the Gunslinger studied her target, she gains a +2 bonus to damage rolls up to a maximum of +6 after three rounds of study. This ability costs 1 Grit

maybe make a successful attack an auto crit threat if it seems weak, math is far from my strong suit and this is just a general idea form the top of my head :P

3 hours of straight reading later I made it to the end of this VERY long thread (Hallelujah!). Although i have to say it made for very interesting reading.

After finishing the thread I went back through the pages to try and download Ashiel's latest version of the gunslinger to see what its all about. I noticed that my version listed Desperado as a standard action while i remember somewhere early-mid page two people were talking about changing it to a full round action so I'm not entirely sure if i have the latest version or not (maybe a link posted in the OP that gets updated with the latest version of Ashiels class? would be very convenient)

Operating on the assumption that I have the latest version, I noticed several things.

1) I really like the grit mechanic as its written in Ashiel's version, I can picture the western with the gunslinger standing in the middle of a rough an tumble western town trading barbs with the BBEG as his minions slowly start surrounding him... negotiations break down and andthe gunslinger lets loose with a Desperado taking out most of the mooks before using Rolling dodge to dive for cover while injuring more.

By this point you've probably spent most of your Grit and fire from cover gaining it back slowly for next set of daredevil stunts much like an old Western. I have nothing but praise for this mechanic, although I was a bit confused by some wording. Specifically it says that you can spend no more grit than your Gunslinger level so a 3rd level gunslinger can spend no more than 3 grit. Is this no more than 3 grit per round? or is it no more than 3 grit per deed? some clarification would be nice

The only other thing is that I agree with CMB that there should be more grit recovery abilities. There are 4 rather than the two CMB mentioned namely:

Deadeye shot - 1 grit for a successful attack, good grit farming ability
Rolling shot - much like Deadeye, also good grit farming ability and both available at level one

the other two are:
Close wound - very flavorful and gives a good amount of grit but very circumstantial so not a reliable source to regain from
Blinding shots - 1 grit per critical hit so long as the Gunslinger has 1 grit remaining, good for anyone with Improved critical but it still comes down to luck and I know I've gone entire sessions without rolling anything higher than a 7

The gunslinger looks like he'll be spending grit like mad as he gets to the mid-to high levels so more grit gaining abilities would be nice. A Greater Deeds version of the level one grit gaining abilities that grants two or 3 grit might work well in my opinion

As a sniper fanboy I'd definitely like to see more sniper like abilities but that's just my very biased opinion :P

On an unrelated note:
One more bullet, Do you feel lucky punk? <3 this so much :D

Alright KaeYoss you've converted me fully :)

Even still though, I think the samurai would be much easier to create as it's own base class. We both agree more options = more better and a popular fix for the samurai I'm seeing is having a particular fighting style be selected at character creation with TWF, THF, polearms, bows, and mounted combat as some of the choices. I kind of favor this option myself but it smacks of the ACFs from the Advanced Players Guide while this was supposed to be an alternate (or variant, not quite sure anymore) class in itself.

Obviously if they do the above "pick a fighting style at character gen" I'd like them to add a bit more on mounted combat than they have currently, particularly with Mounted archery as the Cavalier class cover melee lancers pretty well. In fact I'd like them to do for each of the styles what they did with the cavalier. Sure a fighter can make a competent knight with the right feats but the class features of the cavalier enhance it to make the cavalier a better mounted warrior than any other Pathfinder class to date.

Something similar could be done when people choose fighting styles. After choosing a style you get access to class features to enhance that style and make it more powerful at the appropriate levels. But even the cavalier has to take the mounted combat chain or the abilities mean nothing.

So if a samurai were to choose the TWF style at level 1 they have to get two-weapon fighting, improved version, greater version, etc with normal feat slots. But because they picked TWF style they get class abilities that might say reduce TWF penalties to 0/0 instead of -2/-2 or another feature that allows them to dual wield one handed weapons at -2/-2 and maybe a third that lets allows them to use their strength score in place of dex when qualifying for TWF feats.

Anyway something like that for each style. Also, I'd say the gunslinger seems more like a variant ranger than a variant fighter to me if it wasn't it's own class. I dunno, every time I look at gunslinger I think about the cliche ambush at the canyon pass In Old Westerns. With gunslingers aiming down their Smith & Wesson repeating rifles in a roucky outcropping fighting Injuns and such. It's they way I'd like to play a gunslinger anyway lol

Sethos wrote:

I'd rather keep that slot open for a pure mounted warrior of some sort like the Mongolian horse archers or Persian/Byzantine Cataphracts

So the alt classes have slots now? It's not as if these things were limited. If there is a limit, it's a limit on what people want.

Slots are just something I assumed, they have a Paladin variant, and prospective Fighter, Rogue and Cavalier variants as well. Pattern shows that no class has more than one prospective variant and that's probably not going to change in the near future 'till all or most of the classes have at least one variant.

Yes its an assumption but I don't think its a wild and baseless one, I'm sure Paizo will implement what they think the majority of people will enjoy and it seems clear to me that a majority of people on these forums want the Samurai mount to be optional.

As you've said yourself mounted combat is not very popular and is in fact a turnoff to many players so its not likely to receive much love from Paizo. They'll be trying to make as many people as possible happy and mounted combat fans aren't very many. I predict probably a single obligatory alt class for the Cavalier (other classes are getting them so why not the Cavalier?) before returning to catering to the majority. I'm fine with that, I just want whatever love Paizo chooses to give to Mounted Combat be something good, namely an Alt class whose focus is on a mount.

I'm not even sure why were are arguing. We agree on everything except that I'd prefer not to have the samurai being the one obligatory alt class for cavalier before Paizo forgets about it and goes on to produce classes and variants for more popular themes. That's why I push to have the samurai as a Fighter or Paladin variant instead or be its own base class.

To people saying, its based on cavalier so it needs to be mounted, Why cant it be based on cavalier to use the order ability, the challenge ability, and banner. Those abilities ooze samurai.

Why cant it have the order ability, the challenge ability, and banner and NOT be a cavalier archetype? The way both sides seem firmly entrenched it might be better to make the Samurai its own class and free it from the idea that it must be mounted as a Cavalier archetype

Mount, there is a place for it, but theres also a place for an unmounted samurai, so why not make it optional? I just don't see the position of no, it doesn't deserve to have an option, because the cavalier doesn't or because historically samurai where mounted, Historically they were mount less as well. Its a fairly simple request to add a short little or clause into the power and change it to samurai bond or something.

I voiced my opinion why in a previous post

Much like the katana and wakizashi are iconic of samurai to the majority of posters here. The mount is iconic of the knight in shining armor that the cavalier is supposed to represent.

A samurai could do without it's other staples like the wooden armor, bow, polearms and mount. So long as he has the two swords people KNOW he is supposed to be a Samurai because of those iconic weapons. In the same way, a person can be dressed in rusty chainmail with a splintered shield and a warped lance, the fact that he's on a horse causes people to IMMEDIATELY recognize him as a Knight.

So, at least in my opinion, variant on the cavalier should be mount centric.

I have no problem with giving the samurai the option to choose between a mount or [other, as yet undecided]. As long time fan of Paladins and mounted combat from 3.5 i just feel that any alt class or variant class, whatever you want to call it, should be mount centered.

The samurai in the pdf fits this bill pretty well, but obviously not everyone is as big of a fan of mounted combat as I am and there is plenty of precedent for a mount less samurai. I just ask, that if the samurai is changed to make the mount optional (something I think probably should be done)then it should not be labeled as a Cavalier archetype/variant class/alt class. I'd rather keep that slot open for a pure mounted warrior of some sort like the Mongolian horse archers or Persian/Byzantine Cataphracts

@KaeYoss You misunderstand, I SUPPORT the idea of giving samurai the option of choosing a mount or weapon. I only feel that if the mount were no longer mandatory then the class stops being a Cavalier variant. If samurai were to get the mount as an option rather than a mandatory thing that the samurai would do better as a Fighter or Paladin variant

Sethos wrote:

this is a CAVALIER variant class anything less than a mount centric variant class stops being a cavalier variant.

That's nonsense. It's a cavalier variant because it uses enough class abilities that it makes sense to base it off the class. What the original class was does not matter in the least. It is NOT a cavalier. It is a samurai, which might be based on the cavalier, but if it were a cavalier, it would be called cavalier.

I'll have to agree to disagree with you here. Much like the katana and wakizashi are iconic of samurai to the majority of posters here. The mount is iconic of the knight in shining armor that the cavalier is supposed to represent.

A samurai could do without it's other staples like the wooden armor, bow, polearms and mount. So long as he has the two swords people KNOW he is supposed to be a Samurai because of those iconic weapons. In the same way, a person can be dressed in rusty chainmail with a splintered shield and a warped lance, the fact that he's on a horse causes people to IMMEDIATELY recognize him as a Knight.

So, at least in my opinion, variant on the cavalier should be mount centric. This gives paizo two options.

1) make the mount optional and make the samurai a variant of a different class (Fighter and Paladin would fit best) this is my preferred option

2) keep the mount mandatory and add more mount related class features

It's a personal opinion, but if this is supposed to be a cavalier archetype (see knight in shining armor above) then the mount should be mandatory

First off, +1 to all R_Chance's posts

In regards to mounted combat, classes focus on it in three degrees.

1) the Fighter - Mounted Combat is far from centric to this class though it can be performed and performed well if built that way. However the main focus of this class is usually foot soldiering

2) the Paladin - a kind of middle ground. You can choose if you want the shiny weapon (foot soldier) or the mount (mounted combat). Mounted combat is more encouraged and a bit more centric to this class than it is for the fighter but the option makes it less centric than number three, the cavalier

3) Cavalier - says it in the name, mounted combat is the defining feature of this class. Sure, you can make a foot soldier cavalier and he can perform just fine. However, like the fighter, making a cavalier a foot soldier does not play to all the classes strength. Mounted Combat

In my opinion both sides raised good points, Samurai were historically horse archers. Although as others have pointed out, archery became less important as time went on. While I don't mind there being an "option" to choose between a mount or a foot soldier type Samurai, this is a CAVALIER variant class anything less than a mount centric variant class stops being a cavalier variant.

I think the best compromise between those who insist on an optional mount and those who insist a mount should be there would be something along the lines of what R_Chance is suggesting. Although I think most of the posters here would be upset at calling it a bushi, best to leave the name Samurai and squeeze it in as a fighter or Paladin variant (Paladin works best in my opinion but it already has a variant).

I would instead suggest the Mongolian horse archers substituting the current Mounted archer Samurai. Or, to shake things up a bit, Persian and Byzantine Cataphracts as Cavalier variant classes(how often do you see middle east elements in D&D?)