IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
What say the incredible Paizo community?
As an aside...I don't feel this opens the door too wide, I, for the life of me, cannot think of any iconic "classes" that could come from, say South american or african cultures...it's just that the asian theme has always been...unique.
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
What say the incredible Paizo community?
As an aside...I don't feel this opens the door too wide, I, for the life of me, cannot think of any iconic "classes" that could come from, say South american or african cultures...it's just that the asian theme has always been...unique.
New 'asian' classes could be done if they fit in the setting, but the splatbook ones are very, very bad. They have no flavor and mechanically, they are outright awful, in all cases they are a weak, overly-restricted version of a core class thats better in pretty much every way. The ninja is almost passable, for a certain conception of ninja, but the rest should be burned.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
No.
It's bad enough that the original 3.5 Complete Splatbooks wasted a base class in each book on an asian themed class, I don't need any more of them in the core. If I want to play an asian RPG, I'll play an asian RPG. It's not that people don't play asian classes because they aren't in the core books, it's that people don't want to play asian classes, which is why they are not in the core book. The monk gets a pass only because he was in a prior edition, and even then, adventure writers/setting creators have struggled to make that one-off class make sense.
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
What say the incredible Paizo community?
As an aside...I don't feel this opens the door too wide, I, for the life of me, cannot think of any iconic "classes" that could come from, say South american or african cultures...it's just that the asian theme has always been...unique.
I like the asian themes they've used so far, and look forward to the expansion of the lands based on this theme (which they've already announced as planned). But an important thing to remember, in terms of crunch, is that the majority of existing material along this theme is off limits to Paizo.
In regards to the current project, however, I don't think they should vary too far from the traditional western fantasy that's presented in the 3.5 core books. Nor do I think there should be new character classes specifically to fit a particular theme. Such concepts should be able to be applied to the core classes to achieve a desired end, with prestige classes used to fill any abilities the core classes lack.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
There's no reason that the core rules need to be expanded to include these. At the moment, Paizo is limited to only OGL content, so they are focusing on the core elements for understandable reasons. But there's no reason that forthcoming splaltbooks and accessories can not play important roles in any given campaign or adventure. Just as they were able to make reference to various non-core classes when WotC's intellectual property was open to them in Dungeon and Dragon, they can do the same with anything they release after the core PFRPG comes out next August. I think that the goal of making the core book(s) as much a cognate of the original D&D 3.5 material as possible is the right way to go.
I was specifically referring to the PFRPG re-envisioning of said themes. I agree with you Sebastian, the previous splat has been awful. Gimmicky crud that was little more tha page inflation run rampant.
I would like to see a PF splat showing the "niche" core (contradiction?) for other cultures. Golarion will supposedly include areas themed as "Arabian" "asian" and possible "african". A single or small subset of classes expounding on the unique culture that the class is derived from seems appropriate.
Something like:
Oni slayer (asian)
Feathered Warrior (south american)
Plainsman (african)
Tomb Warden (egyptian)
Not knowing the details of each "zone" makes it difficult to be more specific. I just have always loved the flavor of the Samurai and Ninja...yet there really is no direct rogue or fighter analog. A PrC doesn't feel right either.
Maybe this would be more of a "kit" book. Gosh knows I've heard enough bellyaching about the loss of those options. Feels more...words escape at the moment ;) to have splat classes themed for location as opposed to built around supposed flaws in the current class structure.
Not knowing the details of each "zone" makes it difficult to be more specific. I just have always loved the flavor of the Samurai and Ninja...yet there really is no direct rogue or fighter analog. A PrC doesn't feel right either.
Maybe this would be more of a "kit" book. Gosh knows I've heard enough bellyaching about the loss of those options. Feels more...words escape at the moment ;) to have splat classes themed for location as opposed to built around supposed flaws in the current class structure.
I'm not a Crunch King... but could these "classes" you're looking for be created through the application of regional feats?
I'm harkening back to discussions from the Editors where they've tried to express that there's a lot that can be done with the Core Classes with the right application of specialized Feats and Skills.
For example: Sable Company in Korvosa, do they need to be a unique class, or can an existing class be made to work with just the right Feats and Skills?
A fighter doesn't seem much in 3.5, and it seems unlikely that you could pry Power Attack and Cleave out a Fighter's dead cold hands, but with PFRPG it might be possible to make a Samurai out of a fighter with role-playing elements like a Code, specific Skills, and the right regional Feats.
Again, not being a master of crunchy rules, I don't know if this idea has legs or not... But maybe it can be done that way.
Personally I don't think we need any additional classes. Samurai were nothing more than warriors with a title, a horse, and a big ego. Like the rest of them it could just be different flavors of the core classes like Watcher recommended. Want an oni hunter? Create a ranger variant with an alternate spell list and a favored enemy geared towards hunting oni. Like Watcher suggested I think a lot more can be done with regional feats and skills.
Instead of new classes that are just variations on a theme I would like to see more class variants (which is one of the best parts of UA and AU). Feats and skills provide a great deal of flexibility to the system that could be fleshed out and expanded.
Personally I don't think we need any additional classes. Samurai were nothing more than warriors with a title, a horse, and a big ego. Like the rest of them it could just be different flavors of the core classes like Watcher recommended. Want an oni hunter? Create a ranger variant with an alternate spell list and a favored enemy geared towards hunting oni. Like Watcher suggested I think a lot more can be done with regional feats and skills.
Instead of new classes that are just variations on a theme I would like to see more class variants (which is one of the best parts of UA and AU). Feats and skills provide a great deal of flexibility to the system that could be fleshed out and expanded.
Yes! Much more succiently put! I often don't think of the variants because I GM Runelords, and so I don't often look outside of the Core..
I don't even like the monk, so I must say: please don't. Sorry.
I always thought (and hoped) that the core classes could be just as easily used for far eastern settings.
Fighter = Samurai/Ronin
Rogue = Ninja
Wizard = Wujen
Cleric/Druid = Shinto priest
point taken. Don't like it, but that isn't a pre-requisite for understanding. Just felt they deserved(?) a more...flavorful approach, ex. fighters don't channel ki. Wizards don't deal in ancesrtal spirits, etc.
Thanks for the feedback! Even if you don't agree ;)
|
I saw a VERY STRONG hint dropped elsewhere to expect something with asian-themed classes in the future. I want to say Mike made the comment, but can't recall for certain.
Edit. He did. See Pathfinder Oriental Adventures
point taken. Don't like it, but that isn't a pre-requisite for understanding. Just felt they deserved(?) a more...flavorful approach, ex. fighters don't channel ki. Wizards don't deal in ancesrtal spirits, etc.
Thanks for the feedback! Even if you don't agree ;)
Fighters may not channel ki, but a fighter/monk probably would. And why don't wizards deal in ancestral spirits? It's important to remember that the fluff in which the classes are presented are simply no more than a guideline, and that it is often easy enough to work within these guidelines to create a desired concept.
And as a heads up, I'm pretty sure there's a statement somewhere on these boards in which it is stated they already considered and decided against the addition of new classes to the game; it might take some digging to find.
EDIT: It may also be nothing more than something I saw elsewhere; take it as you will.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
No.
It's bad enough that the original 3.5 Complete Splatbooks wasted a base class in each book on an asian themed class, I don't need any more of them in the core. If I want to play an asian RPG, I'll play an asian RPG. It's not that people don't play asian classes because they aren't in the core books, it's that people don't want to play asian classes, which is why they are not in the core book. The monk gets a pass only because he was in a prior edition, and even then, adventure writers/setting creators have struggled to make that one-off class make sense.
I pretty much agree.
The monk - eh, I can do some hand waiving there and come up with a reason to fit it in fluff-wise.
But, I'm a firm "no" vote to asian classes becoming core. I see nothing wrong with just ladling fluff over the existing classes to make them more "asian." The existing base classes are perfectly customizable as is, IMHO.
Why is DnD, and in extension PFRPG, a Western based RPG? Isn't it more a set up of tropes and rules to run any genre and style of setting, within a certain set of tropes? Why does core have to be explicitly western? I'd really enjoy some true asian style, where you know mundane is actually on par with magic, and not this entrenched magic always trumps mundane, in the western world... classes and play style. I seriously want a fighter that can split the heavens with his sword, and make even mages tremble in fear of his ire. I'd love that.
|
|
You know, until Paizo comes up with something, which Mike suggests it will, you do have at least three options:
1. Take current core classes and insert elements from Oriental Adventures into the classes as variants.
2. Take current core classes as is and simply play them with Asian flavor.
3. Take Oriental Adventures and begin to alter the classes in the flavor of Pathfinder.
Why is DnD, and in extension PFRPG, a Western based RPG? Isn't it more a set up of tropes and rules to run any genre and style of setting, within a certain set of tropes?
I don't think so. D&D has always been designed as a western fantasy game. It was this cultural identity that defined fantasy for the game's founders, and has remained the primary cultural identification of the majority of D&D players as the game continued to change. This is probably why, to myself and many others, asian themed content has always seemed out of place and awkward in the game system, an afterthought to cater to a relatively small (in relation to the hobby as a whole) niche market; it's not built to support anything but western fantasy, and doesn't mesh well with asian fantasy themes, which are very different in structure, concept, and substance.
As I stated before, I love the asian fantasy themes, and enjoy seeing them incorporated into the game when possible. However, it's not a system designed around asian fantasy, and as such should probably stick with western fantasy in its core design elements.
|
Contributor
|
Hi!
As others have pointed out, I did indeed mention that the hypothetical Tian Xia book (Tian Xia being the Golarion equivalent of Asia) will have new standard classes as well as tweaks that can be made to existing standard classes.
That said, one of the tweaks Jason made to the monk for Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Alpha Release 3: Revenge of the Bulmahn ties it in with some ideas I have for classes in the Tian Xia book.
So yeah, I guess what I'm saying is that although they won't be core, there is a very good chance that we'll include some Asian-themed standard and prestige classes. :)
|
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
As core classes, I think they would lose nothing by being called the Knight, Elementalist and Missionary instead.
As pseudo-Japanese classes (I notice you don't propose the Steppe Archer, Fire-Mage or Fakir as Asian classes) they should be in a campaign setting, not core rules.
|
I've never had a problem with Asian themed characters:
Barbarian = Barbarian
Bard = Courtesan
Cleric = Priest also known as a Shugenja
Druid = Shaman
Fighter = Bushi
Monk = Monk
Paladin = Kensai (works even better with the new Pathfinder rules)
Ranger = Ranger
Sorcerer = Sorcerer
Wizard = Wu Jen
then add the class Sohei
otherwise classes like Yakuza and Samurai and Ninja can all be prestige classes or just organizations
this worked just fine for us for many years.
|
|
point taken. Don't like it, but that isn't a pre-requisite for understanding. Just felt they deserved(?) a more...flavorful approach, ex. fighters don't channel ki. Wizards don't deal in ancesrtal spirits, etc.
Thanks for the feedback! Even if you don't agree ;)
Fighters channel ki; they just call it body mechanics.
Wizards deal in ancestral spirits; they just call them whatever planar race they are making deals with at the moment.Thieves form gangs of unrelated individuals who refer to each other as if they were family members, and who form plots to usurp political authority; they just do not call themselves yakuza or triads, and they get different kinds of tattoos.
Etc.
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
What say the incredible Paizo community?
As an aside...I don't feel this opens the door too wide, I, for the life of me, cannot think of any iconic "classes" that could come from, say South american or african cultures...it's just that the asian theme has always been...unique.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Ninja = rogue.
Samurai = fighter.
Wu jen = crap.
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
What say the incredible Paizo community?
As an aside...I don't feel this opens the door too wide, I, for the life of me, cannot think of any iconic "classes" that could come from, say South american or african cultures...it's just that the asian theme has always been...unique.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Ninja = rogue.
Samurai = fighter.
Wu jen = crap.
The Complete Warrior samurai makes everyone cry. It's mechanical identity -- full plate TWFer-- makes no sense. There's no customizability. And they're more gimped than even other fighters in power level.
The Wu Jen is actually, I think, the asian class that added the most to 3.5. In a lower-powered campaign where the DM undrtands not to kill you with monsters of your own CR, a Wu Jen provides an arcanist that doesn't make the party barbarian and bard cry.
|
The problem was never (IMHO) asian-themed classes, it´s was more about non-european-centric classes. It would be ok, i guess, if there was only Fighter, Cleric, Magie, Thief, Barbarian and Sorcerer. They are elegantly generic and we can find paralel in every culture. But Paladin, Druid, Ranger and Bard are too European-centric, and east european nonentheless.
Even more western europe/middle-east campain suffer a bit to put them in. So other culture classes would be nice.
Monk its an Asian class, there could be a monk from India, from Vietnam, from Japan or even a Indonesian Monk (in truth, Europe had her own share of monks, but let it out of discussion).
Because we only study Middle-ages history on school, it not means the middle age was not ocurring around the world. America, Africa, Oceania, thousands of culture (or even a bizarre paralel world consideration like the Civilization series with dead cultures or not yet born cultures).
So what they have unique that afford new classes ? I don´t know, we need new classes ? I managed to do a Woodsman class the was very different mechanically from ranger, but what ? That´s was a my campaing need, what every campaing need ? Maybe we could ask why we need Paladin, Ranger, Druid and Bard. The Swarshbuckler, as a light warrior, is far more generic than them, so is the Scout, Warlock and Spirit Shaman. We can adopt them culture-wise far more easier for not european-centric campaings. So what ?
We can not change too much, this book don´t have that much freedom. But what i understand is that the game we play has a direct European-centric approach and it´s not wrong, is what is meant to be. If we would start putting asian-themed classes we could be doing a lot more globalization stuff too. So let´s stay where we are and wait for others cultures themed supplements.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!Ninja = rogue.
Samurai = fighter.
Wu jen = crap.
The common perception of ninjas is rather more mystical than the rogue.
The fighter only models the fighting ability of the warriors in the Samurai Caste. It has too few skills to model everything else.
Your last coment is inappropiate. Maybe you should explain why the wujen is suboptimal as opposed to using a vulgarity.
While I am all for an oriental adventures setting for Pathfinder. I dont think such belongs in the core book. That setting and the attachec classes are a a smaller segment among gamers as a whole. And honestly, to do such a setting justice it needs to be its own supplemental book and/or setting detail. We need to not clutter up the core book with classes and such of limited appeal.
I would like to see the bulk of fighting mean and women in such a setting being fighters with setting specific options. Same can be done with wizards and clerics through spells. The spells a caster has access to can drastically alter the flavor and focus of the clases. The bulk of ninja could easily be rogues. I honestly think most of the traditional oriental classes could be easily subsumed into a core class as new options without losing any of the flavor or mechanics of the class. A some shinto style priests would actually be a fine example of playing a 'civilized' druid.
If Paizo does include new classes, which was comfirmed in the oriental adventures thread, I would like to see them keep them to a small number and basically be the asian mirror of the more western classes. I dont think there needs to be more than five or six really. For example, I while i found the sohei class to be interesting, I also saw it as heavily stepping on the toes of the monk and thought it would have worked better as a 'feature tree" that monks could take instead of the usual "improved unarmed strike or improved grapple" trees.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
I agree. Samurai are fighters. Ninjas are rogues, and so on. I would be much more interested in publications that supplied a lot of "fluff" as opposed to what, in my opinion, would be a waste of valuable book space on new classes and rules.
But I guess thats where the money is...
|
|
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
While I'm completely hip to adding non-Western elements to my games, I hate the thought of needlessly adding more classes if the concept can be covered by an existing one. Samurai (like knights) should not be a different class--they're fighters with a different set of armor and weapons. Wu Jen are simply a slight variation on wizards (I've even thought of how to modify the Pathfinder wizard for this purpose). Ninja are handled quite well by the Pathfinder rogue. Shugenja (being nothing like their historical counterparts) would be best served as clerics.
New equipment, spells, feats, monsters, prestige classes? Oh, hells yeah! New classes? No thanks, not necessary in the majority of cases. If there are any failings about the current core classes that make them difficult to "re-culture," they should be addressed while the PRPG is still in its alpha.
|
|
I've never had a problem with Asian themed characters:
The problem with this list is that it isn't "Asian-themed," it's Japanese-themed. Not that that's bad, it's just that Japanese culture shouldn't be seen as the undercurrent for all Asian cultures.
Bard = Courtesan
How about just = Entertainer. Y'know, they did have a few of those in Asia. :p
Cleric = Priest also known as a Shugenja
The problem with "shugenja" is that Shugenja were specifically the practitioners of the religion Shugendo.
Fighter = Bushi
Or samurai. Or just... fighter.
Paladin = Kensai (works even better with the new Pathfinder rules)
A kensei (not kensai, which is incorrect) is simply an uber-badass fighter. Historically, kensei was the title given to the reknown swordman (and author of The Book of Five Rings), Musashi. If you really want to pigeon-hole the paladin into Japanese culture, I'd go with the sohei.
Wizard = Wu JenIn Japan, they'd be called Onmyouji.
Around here, the only clear purpose the Wu-jen have is to make other classes who are lacking feel better about themselves.
The problem with this list is that it isn't "Asian-themed," it's Japanese-themed. Not that that's bad, it's just that Japanese culture shouldn't be seen as the undercurrent for all Asian cultures.
China should be the undercurrent.
;)
I personally would not mind seeing samurai not become a class at all. Since it is a social caste that would include several members of various classes...mostly fighters, clerics and intrigue based rogues or even a few experts and aristocrat NPC classes. Dont care for it as a character class myself and the breaking of "samurai = martial focus" that occured in L5R was welcome for that fact. Ninja I think would be better as an organization/origin for a rogue with access to ki abilities instead of minor amd major magic. Shugenja are easily done as clerics with access to an elemental domain or two. Sohei as monks with access to lesser form of rage. Shaman as druid with a large list of spirit based spells and possibly optional "fetch" instead of animal companion. Wu Jen would work best as a variant of sorcerer than wizard i think, since in most settings they are described as having a natural talent and are often self-taught. In essence any can and in my view should be handled via class feature options instead of entirely new classes.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
|
|
I personally would not mind seeing samurai not become a class at all. Since it is a social caste that would include several members of various classes...mostly fighters, clerics and intrigue based rogues or even a few experts and aristocrat NPC classes. Dont care for it as a character class myself and the breaking of "samurai = martial focus" that occured in L5R was welcome for that fact. Ninja I think would be better as an organization/origin for a rogue with access to ki abilities instead of minor amd major magic. Shugenja are easily done as clerics with access to an elemental domain or two. Sohei as monks with access to lesser form of rage. Shaman as druid with a large list of spirit based spells and possibly optional "fetch" instead of animal companion. Wu Jen would work best as a variant of sorcerer than wizard i think, since in most settings they are described as having a natural talent and are often self-taught. In essence any can and in my view should be handled via class feature options instead of entirely new classes.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
I had actually made some comments similar to this in that other thread. The main difference was that I suggested we don't need new classes, but alternative ways at looking at the core classes, including perhaps building in variants.
My frustration is that, when 3e came out, the core classes, IIRC, were supposed to be all you needed to play ANY kind of character. If I am correct, how quickly this was forgotten.
I personally would not mind seeing samurai not become a class at all. Since it is a social caste that would include several members of various classes...mostly fighters, clerics and intrigue based rogues or even a few experts and aristocrat NPC classes. Dont care for it as a character class myself and the breaking of "samurai = martial focus" that occured in L5R was welcome for that fact. Ninja I think would be better as an organization/origin for a rogue with access to ki abilities instead of minor amd major magic. Shugenja are easily done as clerics with access to an elemental domain or two. Sohei as monks with access to lesser form of rage. Shaman as druid with a large list of spirit based spells and possibly optional "fetch" instead of animal companion. Wu Jen would work best as a variant of sorcerer than wizard i think, since in most settings they are described as having a natural talent and are often self-taught. In essence any can and in my view should be handled via class feature options instead of entirely new classes.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
I had actually made some comments similar to this in that other thread. The main difference was that I suggested we don't need new classes, but alternative ways at looking at the core classes, including perhaps building in variants.
My frustration is that, when 3e came out, the core classes, IIRC, were supposed to be all you needed to play ANY kind of character. If I am correct, how quickly this was forgotten.
I agree completely, Saur. Especially given the use of class feature options that we are seeing in Pathfinder. Would be better i think to include something like the OA samurai class feature of ancestral daisho as an option instead of creatig what was in fact just a fighter with one less armor proficiency, a predetermined feat acquisition and access to 'making' his own magic sword. Basically forgo your weapon training bonuses for the options similar to the ancestral daisho feature.
In general, I have become a huge fan of class feature options instead of creating partially re-worked new base classes.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
|
|
Yeah, but how complex we want that? Let me try to list some Asian themed possible classes:
Gengis-Khan type Barbarian (aka Mongol)
Middle-west Dancer/Mystic (aka. Dervish)
Middle-west Assassin/thug (aka. Thug)
Japanese Knights (aka. Samurai)
Japanese Assassin/Spy (Aka. Ninja/Shinobi)
Japanese Witch (Aka. Majo)
Indian Mystic (aka. Guru)
Indian Fighter (aka. Sikh)
They are still barbarians, Mystics, Assassins, Spies, Knights, Witches etc... So we could make them with existing classes, or as example of the European centric classes as Druid, Ranger, Paladin and Bard, wait for specific supplement.
|
|
Here's an idea for wizards in Minkai: Instead of using the normal school specialization like normal wizards, Minkai wizards specialize in elemental* "schools" that function the same (having their own specialist bonus and abilities). The only sticky point would be defining the class of spells that would be "prohibited" due to using a non-standard "school" approach.
* I'm guessing that Minkai's take on the elements is based on the traditional Chinese elements (wu xing) rather than Greek/Indian/Buddhist elements, as that seems more "exotic" (even though both are perfectly "Asian").
I'm all about asian themed material (what with having lived in rural Japan for a year with a host father who was the town sumo champion 5 years in a row) but I think it would do better as a supplement than core. It is also great to see some chinese themes and elements taking the forefront. How about some ancient Indian or Korean themes as well?
Ninja = rogue.
Samurai = fighter.
Wu jen = crap.
The only cool thing about Wu jen are the taboos. Who cares if it can screw you over! It's so flavorful and delicious, it just doesn't matter. And it's stuff like this that makes a class unique.
The core as it is, despite having "western" names for the class concepts, the concept itself is what the class represents. Fighters are all the "soldiers/infantry/cavalry," Druids are all the "holistic natural balance groups like druid/shaman/witchdoctor" and wizards are all the "studied/learned masters of arcane arts and primal forces."
People who complain about the "Asian" classes only think of them as different because they have at some point convinced by a company that needs to sell books that a Fighter just can't be a Samurai, but that's just fooling yourself. A fighter with all the weapon spec. feats for bastard sword, wearing medium/full armor, with quick draw pretty much makes a samurai as I understand them as heavily armored infantry that use special weapons.
Rather than PRPG just translating and adapting these classes to be different from ones that already work, they should just release a blurb in a theme book somewhere that does stuff like PHB II- they add all those little modifications or swapping of class features that change flavor without saying you need a whole new class with its all new rules/personal can of worms to flesh out an idea.
Despite a few cool classes in the last couple years having come out, I always dread to read the first few pages of a splatbook, for lack of a better word, because someone decided that one or two more lame "base" classes need to exist to allow for unimaginative players. It upsets me that people want a set ruling on every little thing. It's a game about imagination with just enough guidelines on paper to give people direction and focus.
Yeah, but how complex we want that? Let me try to list some Asian themed possible classes:
Gengis-Khan type Barbarian (aka Mongol)
Mongols aren't barbarians regardless of what europeans wrote. They were using the decimal system, for instance, when the average european couldn't count beyond the number of digits they possesed. Their military structure was highly more orgnized than thier contemporary european counterparts. In any event, the DND barbarian is patterned after the nordic beserk who are a minority within the nordic culture. Mongols warriors are not DND barbarians on horses but rather fighters with mounted related combat feats who happen to come from a nomadic culture.
People who complain about the "Asian" classes only think of them as different because they have at some point convinced by a company that needs to sell books that a Fighter just can't be a Samurai, but that's just fooling yourself. A fighter with all the weapon spec. feats for bastard sword, wearing medium/full armor, with quick draw pretty much makes a samurai as I understand them as heavily armored infantry that use special weapons.
Let me start by saying that i don't allow people to play any of the classes outside core and do believe as you do that most any archtype can be patterened with the core classes or multiclassing of those core classes.
However, I have to stress this again because I am anal: Samurai is a caste not a warrior. Yes, the bulk of the caste are warriors but a significant portion are not. For example, with the outlawing of other castes from carrying the daisho, for a significant part of the Samurai period in Japan only Samurai could forge the Katana and Wakizashi: therefore, there were many samurai artisans specializing in weaponsmithing. Also, most court functionaries carried the wakizashi because they were Samurai but weren't trained combatants.
PS feel free to ignore paragraph two if you want as i only wrote it to listen to myself :-)
IMO, one of the most criminally underused splat material has been the asian themed stuff. The Samurai, Wu-jen, Shugenja, and all the other cool cats from the far east are excellent examples of how to mix your crunch and fluff while keeping it from getting soggy in milk.
The "problem" with most "asian themed" classes is that there is really no need for them. You can run an "asian themed" campaign using the PHB classes: Bushi/samurai=fighter, ninja/yakuza=rogue, wu-jen=wizard, shugenja=cleric, etc. If you want to add a little more flavor, you can always create/modify a few class variants for specific cultures (not just Japan analogs).
|
|
Mongols aren't barbarians regardless of what europeans wrote.
Or contemporary and later Chinese sources. The Chinese of the Song dynasty didn’t have much love for the Mongols, for instance (not that such disdain helped to keep them from being conquered by those “barbarians”). :)
They were using the decimal system, for instance, when the average european couldn't count beyond the number of digits they possesed. Their military structure was highly more orgnized than thier contemporary european counterparts. In any event, the DND barbarian is patterned after the nordic beserk who are a minority within the nordic culture. Mongols warriors are not DND barbarians on horses but rather fighters with mounted related combat feats who happen to come from a nomadic culture.
Well, the same holds true with European “barbarians.” Both the Celts and Teutonic peoples get maligned unfairly by contemporary and later writers (the Celtic metallurgy was more advanced than that of the Romans or Greeks, and Vikings were excelled as seafarers and traders, etc.). “Barbarian” is simply a term that one civilization applies to another when they’re trying to feel superior about themselves (seems to happen a lot, too).
But what does any of that have to do with the D&D barbarian? The concept of the D&D barbarian is loosely based on the view of historic outsider civilizations (Celts, Vikings, Mongols, etc.) as seen through the eyes of a prevailing civilization (like the Greeks, Romans, Chinese, etc.)—and then filtered through “fantasy-conversion engine.” So, really, if the D&D barbarian is good enough for pseudo-Celts, pseudo-Vikings, pseudo-Amerindians, etc., it’s good enough for pseudo-Mongolians–let’s not hold “East” and “West” (which are, IMO, outdated and obsolete concepts) to different standards.
Here's an idea for wizards in Minkai: Instead of using the normal school specialization like normal wizards, Minkai wizards specialize in elemental* "schools" that function the same (having their own specialist bonus and abilities). The only sticky point would be defining the class of spells that would be "prohibited" due to using a non-standard "school" approach.
* I'm guessing that Minkai's take on the elements is based on the traditional Chinese elements (wu xing) rather than Greek/Indian/Buddhist elements, as that seems more "exotic" (even though both are perfectly "Asian").
I would think Minkai elementalis would be based more on the godai since it equates to Japan than the wu hsing. And the godai is close to the hermetic...earth, fire, aire, water and void (where hermetic has aether). Using wu hsing for one group of wizards (from the equivalent of china) and the godai for another (minkai) would be interesting color to the region.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
Yeah, but how complex we want that? Let me try to list some Asian themed possible classes:
Gengis-Khan type Barbarian (aka Mongol)
Middle-west Dancer/Mystic (aka. Dervish)
Middle-west Assassin/thug (aka. Thug)
Japanese Knights (aka. Samurai)
Japanese Assassin/Spy (Aka. Ninja/Shinobi)
Japanese Witch (Aka. Majo)
Indian Mystic (aka. Guru)
Indian Fighter (aka. Sikh)They are still barbarians, Mystics, Assassins, Spies, Knights, Witches etc... So we could make them with existing classes, or as example of the European centric classes as Druid, Ranger, Paladin and Bard, wait for specific supplement.
That list is the sort of thing I would like to see avoided. It would lead to far too many base classes, which i decidedly dont think the game needs. Especially when they can be brought in as class options without creating entirely new classes that really only have a few alterations in mechanics and some color difference.
Aside from that in itself, I disagee with the list because many of those destinctions are cultural or social status not class. As mentioned before, not every samurai was a warrior. Same with the Indian warrior Kshatriya caste. There were many members of both who received only basic weapon training. Dervish is more a religious thing. Mongols would include many different classes and to me is more a culture and to me would not even have many barbarian class characters. They just were not known for a berserker tradition.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
|
|
That list is the sort of thing I would like to see avoided. It would lead to far too many base classes, which i decidedly dont think the game needs. Especially when they can be brought in as class options without creating entirely new classes that really only have a few alterations in mechanics and some color difference.
And that was exactly what i was saying in my post. I was even saying that we should exclude Paladin, Druid, Ranger and Bard too, as they were merely europan cultural version of generic classes.
Aside from that in itself, I disagee with the list because many of those destinctions are cultural or social status not class. As mentioned before, not every samurai was a warrior. Same with the Indian warrior Kshatriya caste. There were many members of both who received only basic weapon training. Dervish is more a religious thing. Mongols would include many different classes and to me is more a culture and to me would not even have many barbarian class characters. They just were not known for a berserker tradition.-Weylin Stormcrowe
Well, the same could be said about Knights, Warlords, Barbarians, Druids etc... We use their name only to invoke a mental image.
A knight is so parallel with the samurai that the words could be translations.
That list is the sort of thing I would like to see avoided. It would lead to far too many base classes, which i decidedly dont think the game needs. Especially when they can be brought in as class options without creating entirely new classes that really only have a few alterations in mechanics and some color difference.
And that was exactly what i was saying in my post. I was even saying that we should exclude Paladin, Druid, Ranger and Bard too, as they were merely europan cultural version of generic classes.
Aside from that in itself, I disagee with the list because many of those destinctions are cultural or social status not class. As mentioned before, not every samurai was a warrior. Same with the Indian warrior Kshatriya caste. There were many members of both who received only basic weapon training. Dervish is more a religious thing. Mongols would include many different classes and to me is more a culture and to me would not even have many barbarian class characters. They just were not known for a berserker tradition.-Weylin Stormcrowe
Well, the same could be said about Knights, Warlords, Barbarians, Druids etc... We use their name only to invoke a mental image.
A knight is so parallel with the samurai that the words could be translations.
First, I apologize if i misconstrued your post. It seemed to me that you were suggesting the list as possible core classes.
I would not equate knight to samurai myself. By default the knight of the medieval era was a martial title, samurai was not. Knight was not a hereditary ranking, samurai was. As a meber of the samurai caste one did not always train beyond basics of knowing the sword nor did you have earn that title you were born samurai, though some rare individuals could earn their way into the caste. I agree though that Ranger, Paladin, Druid, Knight, Warlord, Barbarian and such should be subsumed back into one of the four core classes the originated from, but i know that will not happen in D&D or its derivitives.
As you mentioned, many classes are variants of the broad classes (sometimes mis the days when Paladin and Ranger were flatout refered to as sub-classes). Now our broad classes have expanded to 11. Since that is the case , I would simply say include options under the current core classes to cover the asian themed characters.
-Weylin Stormcrowe