Ninja class now up (version 0.8) can be customized to be magical or just good at martial arts, can get a version of hentonjutsu as early as 2nd level (it's a stance), get's only 5d6 sneak attack over twenty levels (but with a technique can spend a Ki point to increase the sneak attack damage up to 10d6 at 20th level),and has a bonus to throwing shuriken (mostly for flavor).
Evil Lincoln, if you would like to go over there and give me a couple ideas that I can put into the class I would appreciate.
Does anyone remember the Oriental Adventures supplement for 3.0? (Lot5R, I think.) There was a ninja there, yes? Is it salvageable or useless?
There was a ninja PrC but it was pretty blah.
The Rokugan Campaign Setting had a Ninja class and it was kinda good but it loses steam around 10th level. It had a nift ninja dodge bonus, but with the new rules it get's really awkward to convert (I tried).There was a ninja in the Complete Adventurer that I really liked, but Sudden Strike was kinda awkward compared to Sneak Attack.
.
..
...
....
.....
I enjoyed reading ***THIS*** thread and to be honest, discounting warped ninja-tv/fictional portrayals in comic/film/animations, the Ninja = Bard argument works for me.
The main hang ups people seem to have against bard = nina is their belief that n-njas kill people super-fast/super-good.
Obviously each person's perception of 'What is Ninja' will vary depending on the ninja-esque influence they've been exposed to, assimilated and internally interpreted.
However, my take on ninjas is - they sneak around and avoid combat because it's a good way to: Wake everybody up/die horribly
This would be *why* a ninja relies on stealth and avoiding combat in preference to killing their target, if any. A target that would be in a situation where they are at the mercy (coup-de-grace) of the ninja.
..the idea that 'Ninjas have to fight well and kill quick' seems to detract from the skill-set of a ninja and why it was utilised, i.e locating the target, circumventing obstacles to reach the target and knowing where and when the target was most vulnerable so as to be able to be able to take them out with minimal effort.
..
..
..and when it comes to killing people, getting them while they sleep is sure-fire winner. Didn't the Japanese develop crunchy paper floors for the bedroom of important 'ninja-target' inderviduals? Seems like a society living with the fear of 'coup-de-grace while yo usleep!'
What's more, in such a stratified society with such connected communities, strangers stuck out like sore thumbs - a rogue can only sneak so much while a bard can reliably pretend to be someone else/adopt a role that grants social camoflague.
Personally I'd like some feats to grant poison use but even then, no-one claims that ninjas have to make every poison/tool the use - this would be why they are part of clans/belong to orginisations who's members consist of talented, skilled people m'thinks.
Lastly, as hinted at by a previous posters a ninja doesn't have to be one class - it can be anyone that accomplishes the goals of the clan (and if you want to fall back on fantasy, anyone that dons black/dark red PJ's).
|
Example ninja at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th level. 20 point buy. Created with Hero Lab.A 20th level melee character with a 16 armor class.
You'll notice I gave him no armor, weapons, or equipment whatsoever. To me, it's a bit dishonest to pad a build's stats with equipment. You can take a 1st level commoner and make him look impressive if you throw enough magical items onto him.
|
|
I don't understand why everyone seems to think that a Ninja = the Asian version of a Rogue. So there are/were no "Rogues" in Asia other than Ninjas? Heh. I guess children picking pockets on the street in Asia are just Ninjas in training?
No one said all rogues were ninjas. Hell, nobody even said that all ninjas were rogues. But what we ARE saying is that there's no need to make a brand new class to do what an existing class already does, only while wearing black pajamas.
|
.
The main hang ups people seem to have against bard = nina is their belief that n-njas kill people super-fast/super-good.
Obviously each person's perception of 'What is Ninja' will vary depending on the ninja-esque influence they've been exposed to, assimilated and internally interpreted.
However, my take on ninjas is - they sneak around and avoid combat because it's a good way to: Wake everybody up/die horribly
Description of a bard from the book
"Untold wonders and secrets exist for those skillful enough to discover them. Through cleverness, talent, and magic, these cunning few unravel the wiles of the world, becoming adept in the arts of persuasion, manipulation, and inspiration. Typically masters of one or many forms of artistry, bards possess an uncanny ability to know more than they should and use what they learn to keep themselves and their allies ever one step ahead of danger. Bards are quick-witted and captivating, and their skills might lead them down many paths, be they gamblers or jacks-of-all-trades, scholars or performers, leaders or scoundrels, or even all of the above. For bards, every day brings its own opportunities, adventures, and challenges, and only by bucking the odds, knowing the most, and being the best might they claim the treasures of each."
The role playing is as important as the combat to me. Can you cobble together a multiclass that can do most of what a ninja can do. Yes, if you are willing to have a character that doesn't use half of it's irrelevant (to character) abilities and whose relevant (to character) abilities are well below the level of the character.
As I pointed out above, a 20th level melee character with a 16 AC is unacceptable, because it would die quickly and without purpose in any level appropriate combat.
Yes you can get higher, but without a level of monk you would need to be armored, and with a level of monk you are lawful...which makes the assassin part hard.
I concede a variant of either ranger or rogue, or a prestige class could work. And I agree creating an Anime style ninja isn't what I want in my role playing. But I think what I posted above would be balanced, fit nicely into existing games without getting all anime, and would be closer to the general conception of "ninja" than any of the creations posted so far using existing rules.
|
|
I don't understand why everyone seems to think that a Ninja = the Asian version of a Rogue. So there are/were no "Rogues" in Asia other than Ninjas? Heh. I guess children picking pockets on the street in Asia are just Ninjas in training?No one said all rogues were ninjas. Hell, nobody even said that all ninjas were rogues. But what we ARE saying is that there's no need to make a brand new class to do what an existing class already does, only while wearing black pajamas.
Actually, seekerofshadowlight did say that ninjas were rogues earlier, but I think he's changed his mind on that and conceded the need for a variant.
And least that is where I think the comment was coming from.
|
|
As I pointed out above, a 20th level melee character with a 16 AC is unacceptable, because it would die quickly and without purpose in any level appropriate combat.
How many characters, 20th level or not, would have a AC that's much higher than that if they don't have any equipment whatsover? My sample ninja is a build of the character, not me showing off how fancy I can get with shoving magical items onto a character.
|
|
You'll notice I gave him no armor, weapons, or equipment whatsoever. To me, it's a bit dishonest to pad a build's stats with equipment. You can take a 1st level commoner and make him look impressive if you throw enough magical items onto him.Example ninja at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th level. 20 point buy. Created with Hero Lab.A 20th level melee character with a 16 armor class.
Fair enough, but lets assume the ninja has no armor, which I believe would be the general conceit for the man in the black pjs, at least I hope it would be.
That means at best you are looking at bracers and a ring of protection adding +5 each.
You can't take a level of monk, because monks are lawful. PF Dualist doesn't fit and only gives you the AC for each level you take.
My 15th level monk in 3.5 got his AC over 30, easy. He can dimension door (more often in PF than in 3.5) and instant kill (quivering palm) while running at +50, having 3 good saves (with improved evasion),spell resistance, is being immune to all poisons and diseases and he can also heal himself.
Ninjas don't need 3 good saves (I would just go reflex actually) or spell resistance or immunity to disease, or the ability to heal themselves. I don't even think they need sneak attack, personally.
I think the build you made, played as a Ninja, would not be competitive at level. The build itself would be fine, but not if you aren't wearing armor, which I think is a key part of the ninja concept.
I'm not trying to be an ass or attack what you are saying. I'm glad you provided a basis for discussion on the topic, as most everyone else has been criticizing without showing what they think of as a ninja. I'm just saying at minimum a variant is needed, and I think that variant on existing builds could be as hard to pull off as a new class.
But maybe no armor isn't part of your ninja concept. Which is part of what I wanted this to discuss. What would you describe a ninja as, what should a ninja be.
Maybe list off the features to you that say ninja. For me its
1. No armor.
2. Not lawful (has to kill people)
3. Can turn invisible (at some reasonable level point)
4. Smoke effects and obfuscation
5. Short distance teleportation (at some reasonable level)
The other stuff I think can be negotiated, I hear people about the wikipedia saying their ninja doesn't shapeshift, etc...I would want everything in the wikipedia entry in a perfect world. I would also like a pony.
But if we can come to consensus on what it must have, I think we can be ok. Both of us have laid out ideas that meet our personal "Ninja" criteria. I wish others would do the same so we can see where we agree and go from there.
|
|
1. No armor.
2. Not lawful (has to kill people)
3. Can turn invisible (at some reasonable level point)
4. Smoke effects and obfuscation
5. Short distance teleportation (at some reasonable level)
1. Rogues don't HAVE to wear armor.
2. Rogues are mostly non-lawful.3. Rogue Talent - Major Magic: Vanish
4. Smokesticks
5. Shadowdancer Special Ability - Shadow Jump
Also, I wouldn't totally agree on the no armor thing. I think that leather armor or a chain shirt under the black pajamas is perfectly reasonable.
What features would I consider ninja-esque? Hmm..off the top of my head, and in order of importance:
1. Stealth - Ranks should be maxed at every level, and stealth NEEDS to be a class skill. Feats, traits, and other methods of pumping up Stealth should be used at practically every opportunity, as well as amplifying it with Fast Stealth, etc. Stealth is, to me, the defining feature of the ninja. If you don't max out your stealth, you aren't a ninja.
2. Sneak Attack damage is necessary.
3. Keep Acrobatics, Climb, and Disguise skills at high modifiers.
That's it, really.
|
|
As an example of how anyone can make something pretty good by throwing magic items and equipment onto it, this is a FIRST LEVEL COMMONER:
CG Medium Humanoid (Human)
Init +13; Senses Perception +7
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 36, touch 23, flat-footed 28 (+8 armor, +7 Dex, +5 natural, +5 deflection, +1 dodge)
hp 10 (1d6+4)
Fort +9, Ref +12, Will +8
DR 5/evil; SR 24
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
Spd 30 ft.
Melee +5 Brilliant Energy, Keen Adamantine Morningstar +10 (1d8+12/19-20/x2)
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 14/20, Dex 18/24, Con 12/18, Int 12/18, Wis 11/17, Cha 10/16
Base Atk +0; CMB +5; CMD 28 (32 vs. Disarm32 vs. Sunder)
Feats Dodge, Improved Initiative, Mobility, Simple Weapon Proficiency - One: Morningstar
Traits Indomitable, Reactionary
Skills Acrobatics +8, Bluff +4, Climb +9, Disguise +4, Perception +7, Sense Motive +4, Stealth +8
SQ Gloves of Dueling, Ring of Regeneration
Combat Gear +5 Brilliant Energy, Keen Adamantine Morningstar; Other Gear Amulet of Natural Armor +5, Belt of Physical Perfection, +6, Boots of Speed, Bracers of Armor, +8, Cloak of Resistance, +5, Gloves of Dueling, Goggles of Night, Headband of Mental Superiority, +6: Stealth, Sense Motive, Helm of Teleportation, Mantle of Faith, Ring of Protection, +5, Ring of Regeneration, Robes of Xin-Shalast
--------------------
SPECIAL ABILITIES
--------------------
Gloves of Dueling These supple leather gloves grant the wearer gains a +4 bonus to his CMD against disarm attacks, attempts to sunder his wielded weapons, and effects that cause him to lose his grip on his weapons (such as grease). The wearer doesn’t drop held weapons when panicked or stunned. If the wearer has the weapon training class feature and is using an appropriate weapon, his weapon training bonus increases by +2.
Indomitable +1 to saves vs. enchantment spells and effects.
Mobility +4 to AC against some attacks of opportunity.
Ring of Regeneration This white gold ring continually allows a living wearer to heal 1 point of damage per level every hour rather than every day. (This ability cannot be aided by the Heal skill.) Nonlethal damage heals at a rate of 1 point of damage per level every 5 minutes. If the wearer loses a limb, an organ, or any other body part while wearing this ring, the ring regenerates it as the spell. In either case, only damage taken while wearing the ring is regenerated.
He would run roughshod over most low-level characters, and many low level PARTIES.
"Has to kill people" is non-LAWFUL? Are you sure? And keep in mind you're in favor of a ninja who spends his life in training... I don't want to turn this into an alignment thing, but it seems like you're shooting for non-good. Lawful fits a ninja like black pjs.
|
|
As an example of how anyone can make something pretty good by throwing magic items and equipment onto it, this is a FIRST LEVEL COMMONER:
** spoiler omitted **...
Yes, and what is the price for all that equipment vs even a 20th level characters avg allocation for equipment.
And now we've established where we disagree on what we define as a rogue, and we disagree on sneak attack, armor, and if the climb and disguise are supernatural or just really good.
So to be clear (I'm asking not telling) your stance is no need for even a variant class, let alone a prestige or new base class?
I'm curious as to other people's input.
|
|
"Has to kill people" is non-LAWFUL? Are you sure? And keep in mind you're in favor of a ninja who spends his life in training... I don't want to turn this into an alignment thing, but it seems like you're shooting for non-good. Lawful fits a ninja like black pjs.
As a hired assassin, you have to break the law. If if you are going to take money to kill people, you will be breaking the law in most jurisdictions. Otherwise you wouldn't need to be sneaky about it.
|
|
So to be clear (I'm asking not telling) your stance is no need for even a variant class, let alone a prestige or new base class?
I think you can make a perfectly fine ninja from the Core Rules. Add in the APG and you can make a damn good ninja. A new rogue archtype could maybe make it a bit better, but I really don't see it improving it much.
Yes, and what is the price for all that equipment vs even a 20th level characters avg allocation for equipment.
I'm not saying that's a realistic character. My point is that if we're going to compare builds here, let's do it on an even keel...and the best way to do that is to strip the build of all equipment, weapons, armor, etc. That way, it's an honest comparison of the builds, not a comparison of who picked out better equipment.
|
|
I'm not saying that's a realistic character. My point is that if we're going to compare builds here, let's do it on an even keel...and the best way to do that is to strip the build of all equipment, weapons, armor, etc. That way, it's an honest comparison of the builds, not a comparison of who picked out better equipment.
The issue with this is that some classes are built to not need as much equipment.
If that was the standard, Sorcerer, Wizards, and Monks would all come out way ahead.
But that discussion would go way outside of the intent of this thread, and I think the bigger distinction between our sides is our different stances on armor and on the need for additional classes, and I think both of us have made our sides and argument for our side clear.
I just gotta say that I firmly disagree that Ninja should have an alignment restriction, and of all alignment restrictions "non-lawful" would be most inappropriate.
As a hired assassin, you have to break the law. If if you are going to take money to kill people, you will be breaking the law in most jurisdictions. Otherwise you wouldn't need to be sneaky about it.
Unless you're in the Gestapo, and fear of you is exactly what the law rests on. Again, the assassin PrC - who, by definition, kills for money - says nothing about non-lawful. And, law of the land aside, most ninja are tightly bound to their own clans. In most ninja fiction, these clans are highly organized and don't take infractions lightly.
Don't get me wrong, I think we need "good ninja" - pop culture is so infused with these it would seem wrong to leave them out - but non-lawful puts us in barbarian country, not assassin country.
why should it have an aliment restriction and why non lawful? Lawful does not mean never brakes the law, it means they are very orderly and organized. They might have a code they never break. This is the LG/Paladin code confusion yet again type of thing.
Anyhow the only reason I am ok with an archetype is if they do that silly"new weapons stats what what is really the same weapon with a new name" they have done with monk weapons and to replace trap
finding at most. Other then that to me it's all rogue talents
|
|
If Paizo does create a specific ninja class, then I expect one of the class features to be the rule of inverse proportionality. Namely, when there is one ninja, he's is a nigh-invulnerable killing machine. When there are large numbers of ninja, they are useless cannon fodder that die by the hundreds with every swipe of the enemy's sword.
:P
|
|
why should it have an aliment restriction and why non lawful? Lawful does not mean never brakes the law, it means they are very orderly and organized. They might have a code they never break. This is the LG/Paladin code confusion yet again type of thing.
Anyhow the only reason I am ok with an archetype is if they do that silly"new weapons stats what what is really the same weapon with a new name" they have done with monk weapons and to replace trap
finding at most. Other then that to me it's all rogue talents
It isn't an alignment restriction. It is saying the only way to get the unarmored monk feature is for it to be lawful.
I don't think Ninja's need an alignment restriction. But the Monk class has one, so you can't get the benefits of the monk class unless you are lawful.
I'm basically pointing out you can't just multiclass with monk to make a ninja, unless you want a lawful ninja, which most ninjas would not be.
|
|
If Paizo does create a specific ninja class, then I expect one of the class features to be the rule of inverse proportionality. Namely, when there is one ninja, he's is a nigh-invulnerable killing machine. When there are large numbers of ninja, they are useless cannon fodder that die by the hundreds with every swipe of the enemy's sword.
:P
I know you are being sarcastic, but you could actually look at having the ability to "split", which is mentioned it eh Wikipedia entry, with each split being 1/2 powered (1/2 hit points, 1/2 base attack, only one could have the equiptment...) and functionally have this.
Which could be fun, actually.
If Paizo does create a specific ninja class, then I expect one of the class features to be the rule of inverse proportionality. Namely, when there is one ninja, he's is a nigh-invulnerable killing machine. When there are large numbers of ninja, they are useless cannon fodder that die by the hundreds with every swipe of the enemy's sword.
:P
That's just simple CR adjustment logic; that funny guy invented nothing new.
Also, we need to introduce their mortal enemies, the pirates. Which is equally as deserving of a 20 level base class.
Actually, two: sea dog and buccaneer.
|
|
That's just simple CR adjustment logic; that funny guy invented nothing new.If Paizo does create a specific ninja class, then I expect one of the class features to be the rule of inverse proportionality. Namely, when there is one ninja, he's is a nigh-invulnerable killing machine. When there are large numbers of ninja, they are useless cannon fodder that die by the hundreds with every swipe of the enemy's sword.
:P
+1
Plus, the only "cr appropriate challenge" for Chuck Norris would be a super team consisting of
Worf (in the exoskeleton from Aliens)
Mr. T
The inbred Hulk family from that Wolverine: Old Man Logan comic
50 of Kim Jung Il's personal bodyguards for cannon fodder.
|
|
Also, we need to introduce their mortal enemies, the pirates. Which is equally as deserving of a 20 level base class.You mean the swashbuckler class?
No! They are pirates! They wear pirate hats, which entitles them to their own unique 20-level base class.
Prestige classes will also need to be introduced for pirates with hook hands, peg legs, etc.
Not to mention the vast difference between pirates with parrot companions and those with monkey companions.
Again wikipedia scream "I'm a rogue" Pathfinder rogues are much more a ninja then they are a thief.
Mostly agree with this
Indeed, the Ninja archetype can easily be created using the tools we have. I like the bard approach too.
On the other hand, I believe there is a niche for a full BAB 4th level caster (arcane) character class, and the Ninja/Shadowdancer archetype could provide a good concept for such a class.
It would make an interesting, and potentially different concept than the typical armoured, battle-oriented fighter-wizard concept.
'findel
Also, we need to introduce their mortal enemies, the pirates. Which is equally as deserving of a 20 level base class.
Well, if we're going to have ninjas, it goes without saying...
|
As I said above, I can respect that position if you also believe that a Ranger is a fighter Druid/Variant, and a Paladin is a Fighter/Cleric Variant, and a Bard is a Rogue/Sorcerer Variant.
Not to be picky but in previous editions that is exactly whatb they were. Ranger and Paladin were sub-classes of the fighter and Bard was a sub-class of the rogue
|
|
Also, we need to introduce their mortal enemies, the pirates. Which is equally as deserving of a 20 level base class.You mean the swashbuckler class?No! They are pirates! They wear pirate hats, which entitles them to their own unique 20-level base class.
Prestige classes will also need to be introduced for pirates with hook hands, peg legs, etc.
Not to mention the vast difference between pirates with parrot companions and those with monkey companions.
First
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Second
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate
Show me the supernatural powers.
|
|
Blackbeard, a real life badass, had supernatural powers; he got shot twenty times, had to be actually beheaded like a immortal, and his decapitated body swam 20 times around the boat after his demise.
And I think it's telling that a badass highlander (yes, they were real) had to do the job on him with a real claymore; not a museum replica made in Indonesia. This isn't made up. There are bona fide witnesses, they just didn't have CNN yet.
Pirates: not a joke. Bad mo foes.
|
|
Not to be picky but in previous editions that is exactly whatb they were. Ranger and Paladin were sub-classes of the fighter and Bard was a sub-class of the rogueAs I said above, I can respect that position if you also believe that a Ranger is a fighter Druid/Variant, and a Paladin is a Fighter/Cleric Variant, and a Bard is a Rogue/Sorcerer Variant.
I don't disagree with you.
And if people want to home rule to the base 4, more power to them.
But at some point, expansion came. And it was good. And people were able to play more than the classic Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Wizard as base classes.
If they are making an oriental setting, which they are, why try to force the existing concepts in when so many interesting options exist that culture?
We made Rangers and Paladins because of far less well known sub-concepts we wanted to be able to play with specificity. Why is this different?
|
|
Not to be picky but in previous editions that is exactly whatb they were. Ranger and Paladin were sub-classes of the fighter and Bard was a sub-class of the rogue
Well, to correct you, there were four groups that the classes were arranged into. The Warrior group included fighters, rangers, and paladins. The Wizard group included mages and specialist wizards. The Priest group included clerics, druids, and priests of specific mythoi. The Rogue group included thieves and bards.
|
|
Not to be picky but in previous editions that is exactly whatb they were. Ranger and Paladin were sub-classes of the fighter and Bard was a sub-class of the rogueWell, to correct you, there were four groups that the classes were arranged into. The Warrior group included fighters, rangers, and paladins. The Wizard group included mages and specialist wizards. The Priest group included clerics, druids, and priests of specific mythoi. The Rogue group included thieves and bards.
Actually, it used to be 3. Then they added Thieves, probably over the objections of people who said you could do the same thing with a fighter if you used the existing rules.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons
You're all right, and,.....you're all wrong.
I invoke Red Tide movie logic.
|
|
Not to be picky but in previous editions that is exactly whatb they were. Ranger and Paladin were sub-classes of the fighter and Bard was a sub-class of the rogueWell, to correct you, there were four groups that the classes were arranged into. The Warrior group included fighters, rangers, and paladins. The Wizard group included mages and specialist wizards. The Priest group included clerics, druids, and priests of specific mythoi. The Rogue group included thieves and bards.
Actually, it used to be 3. Then they added Thieves, probably over the objections of people who sad you could do the same thing with a fighter if you used the existing rules.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons
I was thinking specifically of 2E, where there were the groups. But yeah, 0E originally had just the three classes: Fighting Man, Magic-User, and Cleric. However, 2E is the only one where they were officially grouped into the four main archtypes, IIRC.
Just remembered that one of my favorite dragon magazines had a 3.5 oriental adventures update, and the updated sohei was a heck of a lot of fun. I had the Lotus Dragons training up a cadre of these guys as enforcers.
Also the 2E ninja book - while the class itself was uninspired (pretty much a tweaked 'rogue') - was actually a pretty fun read, including some stuff on 'non-orient' ninjas that inspired my world's blue eels.
|
|
Why would "most ninjas" be non-lawful? Lawful Evil is THE mythological/stereotypical ninja alignment! Sure, they don't follow the laws of the shogun, but they DO follow the code of the ninja.
1. You will fulfill any contract you accept, or you will die trying.
2. You will never betray the clan.
3. You will protect the identities of those who hire you and who hire us.
4. Anyone who interferes with your clan missions or contracts is someone you are free to kill.
5. Never leave witnesses.
6. Never leave evidence.
7. The code of the ninja is more important than the laws of the land.
I just made this up on the spot and I'm sure you can keep going or dispute these actual points, but I think the point is clear. Ninjas are always organized. Even the 'lone ninja' stereotype is the survivor of a ninja organization. They are criminals, sure, but no alignment does organized crime like Lawful Evil does. The fact that ninjas are always organized and they kill people tells me that they will have some Lawful Evil component, and it will probably be a more popular alignment among them than any other. The lone ninja survivor who seeks revenge for his fallen brethren could be Lawful Neutral or even Good, but the Chaotic ninja is likely to be the outcast who left behind the ninja organization to (pick one: rule the world/get away from that controlling environment) and is now both disowned and hunted by his former clan. Ninjas in good standing with the ninja clan are very likely to be lawful or neutral.
An assassin who does not understand the value of keeping a contract is a worthless tool, politically. An assassin who is not personally invested in keeping the letter of his contract is not an assassin that anybody can trust. And therefore, anybody who has a choice will not choose him.
Of course, I do think that making 'Ninja' a base class actually does a DISSERVICE to ninja mythology. Ninjas can be a very diverse lot, much more diverse than any single class ought to be. You have ninjas who sneak in at night and slaughter with poison and with stealth. You have ninjas who disguise themselves and infiltrate the enemy keeps in order to learn their secrets, or get close to someone they want to kill. You have ninjas who fly and call upon the elements to do their bidding. You have ninjas who guard the dark dojos and fight face-to-face with their enemies. This includes rogues, rangers, clerics, sorcerers, wizards, fighters, bards... pretty much all the base classes except for paladins.
|
|
I would rather see a ninja that is built similar to the 3.5 Beguiler. I think that the ninja needs a 6 level spell progression, the ability to wear light armor, and a lot of sneaky tricks. Spells should be limited to enchantment and a few transmutation spells. They should not have a full bab progression because they are not grunts. They are commandos and the class should reflect that. Lastly they should not have an alignment restriction, not all ninja are assassins and the class should not try and force them into that slot. I want a class that lets me play Storm Shadow or Snake-Eyes. Of course to play Snake-Eyes I also need an animal companion so that should be an option.
Pirates are obviously a type of oracle - they only have one eye so they must be half blind plus er... an oracle can... drive a boat?
|
|
That means at best you are looking at bracers and a ring of protection adding +5 each.A 20th level melee character with a 16 armor class.You'll notice I gave him no armor, weapons, or equipment whatsoever.
Let's throw some equipment on him since that bothers you so much...
Amulet of Natural Armor +5, Bracers of Armor +8, Ring of Protection +5
34 AC (+5 Dexterity, +1 Dodge, +5 Natural, +8 Armor, +5 Deflection)
I'm beginning to think that since there is no need for any asian theme book since there is already a European theme and middle eastern theme. I for one think a ninja class would be great, yes I can kinda sorta make one from a rogue, but I could kinda sorta make a paladin from a cleric or a ranger from a druid.
Yeah....claymore.....katana.....pretty much identnicule.
Agreed if ninja who is mechanically a rogue gains a full class a pirate also needs a full class. As does a swashbuckler, aboriginal fighter, Celtic warrior, fencer, musketeer, Aztec warrior and about 12 dozen other "classes"
If an outfit is reason enough for a new class there best be one for every single thing I listed above. They are just as unique or more so then the ninja and if an Asian rogue gets its one class based off it's underwear they also need base classes.