+1 to the last three posts :D
Here is the Kuji Kiri http://www.lethbridgemartialarts.ca/Docs/Yukibushi.pdf
Hmmmm....9 kuji kiri and 9 levels of spells....hmmm.....
Ninjitsu might even work as a new FORM of magic, with different kinds of ninja: BAB +1, Good Fort, 1d10 HD, 4 level caster ninja, BAB +3/4, Good Reflex, 1d8 HD, 6 level caster ninja, and BAB +1/2, Good Will, 1d6 HD, 9 level caster ninja.
And ryuha or whatever are words of power, and the Ultimate Magic tome will have words of power in it....
Hmmm....
Here is the Kuji Kiri http://www.lethbridgemartialarts.ca/Docs/Yukibushi.pdf
Nice pdf. That's exactly what I was talking about. It'd be cool if they used that for the ninja class.
i could go either way with a ninja class. but i really want an animesque shrine maiden class with a feel similar to that of Hakurei Reimu.
|
I would like to see a sidebar or something, regardless of which way theye go, that allows you to create a ninja like the school that Mochizuki Chiyome started to train kunoichi. Basically kunoichi were female ninja who were trained not only in the art of the ninja but in the art of the geisha and the skills of a shrine maiden as well.
You could go Bard/Cleric/Assassin :) With Courtesian as a Profession skill...
|
|
All good points. In addition, some people, in some games, just want to play Highly Visible Ninja and really do deserve the option from Paizo, even if some people don't like it.
Great article, particularly the mention of no penelty to stealth checks for wearing bright colors. Does anyone know which issue of Dragon had the article about the elemental ninjas? I would love to pick it up and read it.
You could go Bard/Cleric/Assassin :) With Courtesian as a Profession skill...Unless we get a true ninja class....
yeah I was hoping for some new rogue talents to go along with the archetype as well :)
Or we could get a ninja prestige class...
newsflash: this just in
seekersofshadowlight thinks ninja shouldn't be a new class. It should be a rogue archetype.
Actually I think it would work better if it was a split class like in seccond edition because of all the diversity. So you could be Cleric/Ninja and it would be one class, or Fighter/Ninja and it would be one class, and Rogue Ninja would be one class... etc. Just tag Ninja ont which ever class you want with all its special abilities and you get the other classes special abilities. So you would get your Sohei/Ninja, and your Bushi/Ninja and Wu-Jen/Ninja etc...
Just my last flog at a dead horse and I'm done with it.
I've heard all the people who DON'T want a ninja class; feel free to pepper my thread with fear and loathing by all means, but know that I'm making voodoo dolls, printing out your avatar's image, pinning it to the head, and torturing the poor thing's doodads with a pliers.
Is there anybody (sides me) who wants a ninja class? Nobody wanted side treks but me, maybe I'm a minority of one here.
What would Ninja class have that rogue doesn't already have?
What would Ninja class have that rogue doesn't already have?Just my last flog at a dead horse and I'm done with it.
I've heard all the people who DON'T want a ninja class; feel free to pepper my thread with fear and loathing by all means, but know that I'm making voodoo dolls, printing out your avatar's image, pinning it to the head, and torturing the poor thing's doodads with a pliers.
Is there anybody (sides me) who wants a ninja class? Nobody wanted side treks but me, maybe I'm a minority of one here.
Eidolon.
PS. So we can skip the theatrics, no I am not asserting the Ninja would get an Eidolon.
I do; and a Samurai class. I'm sorry but a Cavalier =/= Samurai. Cavaliers require a mount, while not all Samurai do. Yes, the Code of Conduct is similar, but it does NOT make it a Cavalier.
Heh ya know a Samurai was a horseman right? But other then the mount the class pretty much screams "samurai" , which oddly I got from the class more then I ever did "English knight"
Heh ya know a Samurai was a horseman right? But other then the mount the class pretty much screams "samurai" , which oddly I got from the class more then I ever did "English knight"I do; and a Samurai class. I'm sorry but a Cavalier =/= Samurai. Cavaliers require a mount, while not all Samurai do. Yes, the Code of Conduct is similar, but it does NOT make it a Cavalier.
Which is probably because you don't have a historical understanding of the English knight. Knights are a mounted chivalric fighting force.
Which is probably because you don't have a historical understanding of the English knight. Knights are a mounted chivalric fighting force.Heh ya know a Samurai was a horseman right? But other then the mount the class pretty much screams "samurai" , which oddly I got from the class more then I ever did "English knight"I do; and a Samurai class. I'm sorry but a Cavalier =/= Samurai. Cavaliers require a mount, while not all Samurai do. Yes, the Code of Conduct is similar, but it does NOT make it a Cavalier.
How odd, so were samurai. Not the chivalric code,they had their own code. But other then that ya can swap Knight of samurai and it's the same thing other then gear used.
How odd, so were samurai. Not the chivalric code,they had their own code. But other then that ya can swap Knight of samurai and it's the same thing other then gear used.Which is probably because you don't have a historical understanding of the English knight. Knights are a mounted chivalric fighting force.Heh ya know a Samurai was a horseman right? But other then the mount the class pretty much screams "samurai" , which oddly I got from the class more then I ever did "English knight"I do; and a Samurai class. I'm sorry but a Cavalier =/= Samurai. Cavaliers require a mount, while not all Samurai do. Yes, the Code of Conduct is similar, but it does NOT make it a Cavalier.
Then your original statement fails to make sense.
How so? All I said was it scream samurai when I read the class. Just seemed to me as if the class was made to play samurai.
How so? All I said was it scream samurai when I read the class. Just seemed to me as if the class was made to play samurai.
What you said was it seemed more like a samurai than a knight.
yeah, and it does to me. I am not saying it does not work as a knight, but when I read the class it came off more as "samurai" then "knight". The English knight was simply not the first thought I had upon reading the class.
You make my head hurt and it's not worth debating the nonsense.
I don't watch a lot of Anime or stuff like that, so my image of the ninja might be a little different.
I picture a mystical infiltrator with lots of skills, talents, and knowledge. Very competent, kind of a loner, but quite versatile. He uses whatever means he has to get the job done: brute strength, high-tech alchemy, innate mystical powers, specialized tools and weapons, martial arts, stealth, magic items, regular household goods MacGuyvered to meet his needs, charm and wit, and deadly efficiency.
No one told ya to dude. Not like ya can control what my first thought upon reading a class was months ago anyhow.
Screw ninja, I want a Wuxia class.
Hell, you could make the ninja an archtype of that.
Screw ninja, I want a Wuxia class.
Hell, you could make the ninja an archtype of that.
sounds good.
i beleive that we should also have a psionicist class as it fits the asian feel. just drop the crystal stuff.
Okay, so three people besides me want an actual ninja "class."
I haven't counted seekersofshadowlight in that tally.
Me. I wants one. A ninja is similar to a rogue but different enough to not use the rogue chasis. My version would be more of a hybrid between a ranger and a rogue.
I gotta switch camps.
I think that all of the east Asian tropes should be covered as archetypes first, and only failing that should there be a new base class.
Ninja, being a very hard trope to pin down, could be a series of archetypes for multiple existing classes. So it doesn't make the "base class" cut, IMO.
That said, I do think there should be archetypes, and I don't agree that the Rogue does everything you could ever want for a ninja.
I'd like to mention that this isn't "no more base classes evar". I just don't want to see people try to fit the ninja into a base class that everyone can agree on. The blood would run like rivers.
I'm referring to the "Fantasy" Samurai, where the name "Sword Saint" is liberally applied.
The word your looking for is kensei , not Samurai. A kensei was not by default a Samurai but s high skilled swordsmen. A great many kensei founded fighting schools and many were samurai, but no kensei does not mean Samurai
Also I want to point out the samurai were more likely to use a bow, naginata , spear and arquebus over the Katana, also the Wakizashi was the blade the samurai was never without, not the Katana
Screw ninja, I want a Wuxia class.
Hell, you could make the ninja an archtype of that.
Barring an actual ninja class, I could live with this. Nay, thrive.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I gotta switch camps.
I think that all of the east Asian tropes should be covered as archetypes first, and only failing that should there be a new base class.
Ninja, being a very hard trope to pin down, could be a series of archetypes for multiple existing classes. So it doesn't make the "base class" cut, IMO.
That said, I do think there should be archetypes, and I don't agree that the Rogue does everything you could ever want for a ninja.
I'd like to mention that this isn't "no more base classes evar". I just don't want to see people try to fit the ninja into a base class that everyone can agree on. The blood would run like rivers.
I like the idea of multiple ninja archetypes for several classes.
Sort of like how the APG has the Detective/Investigator archetypes for the Bard/Rogue. Same basic character idea, two ways to represent it mechanically, double your gumshoe pleasure.
Some background on ninja mystical powers. Ninja magic is adopted from shugendo, which itself is derivative of chinese daoist mysticism. If they make a shugenja class (as has been done in the past) a good ninja build would be made from a shugenja with rogue or ranger levels.
An interesting side point is that in traditional japanese woodblock prints and paintings, Tengu are often represented as shugenja with long noses, and Japan's most famous samurai-ninja hybrid, Yagyu Jubei Mitsuyoshi was supposedly taught his style of swordsmanship by tengu in the mountainous regions of japan during his long travels as itinerant swordsman. (edit - oops, that was actually Minamoto no Yoshitsune. Got my ninja-samurai hybrids mixed up. But still Jubei Mitsuyoshi is often depicted as a ninja after having gone on a long pilgrimage).
edit- my personal vote is for the use of archetypes, along with some clan specific abilities of some kind. That way "Iga" ninja are good at "this", while "Koga" ninja are more adept at "that".
I gotta switch camps.
I think that all of the east Asian tropes should be covered as archetypes first, and only failing that should there be a new base class.
Ninja, being a very hard trope to pin down, could be a series of archetypes for multiple existing classes. So it doesn't make the "base class" cut, IMO.
That said, I do think there should be archetypes, and I don't agree that the Rogue does everything you could ever want for a ninja.
I'd like to mention that this isn't "no more base classes evar". I just don't want to see people try to fit the ninja into a base class that everyone can agree on. The blood would run like rivers.
That's how I think it should be done. We don't really need a full classes for flavor. The archetypes can do that. To warrant a full class I think it would require something that currently can't be done with archetype in an existing class. For even more in depth flavor add some prestige classes.
For example maybe the Ninja is just the rogue with Ninja archetype and some additional rogue talents. For specific ninja detail with advanced flavor maybe a prestige class.
For example maybe the Ninja is just the rogue with Ninja archetype and some additional rogue talents. For specific ninja detail with advanced flavor maybe a prestige class.
There could also be a bard archetype that changed bardic music for sneak attack, or a ranger archetype, etc. Archetypes are more fun anyway, because they don't create as much controversy. I think they should take this kind of multilateral approach, rather than creating a single base class that everyone is unsatisfied with (except the guy who wrote it!)
The archetype approach also means they could use it in an AP without having to reprint as much of the class.
|
For example maybe the Ninja is just the rogue with Ninja archetype and some additional rogue talents. For specific ninja detail with advanced flavor maybe a prestige class.There could also be a bard archetype that changed bardic music for sneak attack, or a ranger archetype, etc. Archetypes are more fun anyway, because they don't create as much controversy. I think they should take this kind of multilateral approach, rather than creating a single base class that everyone is unsatisfied with (except the guy who wrote it!)
The archetype approach also means they could use it in an AP without having to reprint as much of the class.
archetypes are all kinds of awesome.
Best thing is that the 'swapping-out' element nullifies a lot of cheesy multi-class ability synthesis that more base classes and prestige classes can create while still giving all the awesome character types we want.
For example maybe the Ninja is just the rogue with Ninja archetype and some additional rogue talents. For specific ninja detail with advanced flavor maybe a prestige class.
I think the entire game should consist of exactly one class and archetypes that make that class something else.
Sorry, I'm against any ninja or samurai classes. Too many bad memories from earlier editions and the people who would (in one memorable case) flip the table over if they did not get to play one of these characters or got upset if they were not in every way shape and form better than their non-asian counterpart.
Sorry, I'm against any ninja or samurai classes. Too many bad memories from earlier editions and the people who would (in one memorable case) flip the table over if they did not get to play one of these characters or got upset if they were not in every way shape and form better than their non-asian counterpart.
Wow, Freehold DM, your story makes me sad for you. Those people have really ruined a fantastic aspect of gaming for you. I can't understand people like that.
I love Asian cultures and I love gaming, so getting the two together is a no brainer for me. Unfortunately, because so many folks say that they have had experiences similar to yours, if not as bad, I have encountered too many people who don't like gaming in the Asian genre. It really ruins the fun for folks like me who just want a balanced and compatible version of their favorite game for Asian cultures and genres. I have done my own work in gaming to try and mitigate that negative influence, but it still doesn't fix things due to stories like this one.
I have stayed out of the debates about these class and weapon issues because I know how worked up and irrational some people can get about not wanting to see these classes or weapons with their own entries in the Pathfinder books. I am not especially beholden to either side of the arguements. But I can't help but read the threads and then I feel so tempted to try to correct misrepresentations of what these topics are.
I have a wealth of experience and background just researching these things and living in one of the Asian cultures, but I know it is no use to participate because some folks just know they don't want those classes in the game and won't accept any response that is counter to their point of view because of experiences like yours. (I am not saying this of you; just in general) I have never had an experience like that with other gamers. I only run across the ones that don't want the stuff I like in their games.
I think the entire game should consist of exactly one class and archetypes that make that class something else.
I support this.
I think the entire game should consist of exactly one class and archetypes that make that class something else.I support this.
what about 3 classes, all with different BAB/HD? But everything else is mutable.
I think the entire game should consist of exactly one class and archetypes that make that class something else.
For example maybe the Ninja is just the rogue with Ninja archetype and some additional rogue talents. For specific ninja detail with advanced flavor maybe a prestige class.
Ugh no. Although I would not mind seeing archetypes used more often and silly new classes that are really just archetypes of another class die.
what about 3 classes, all with different BAB/HD? But everything else is mutable.I think the entire game should consist of exactly one class and archetypes that make that class something else.I support this.
What about spellcasting?
Didn't True20 do something like this?
Anyway, I think Cartigan's crazy idea would actually be kind of neat. It would create a power-by-power currency in character advancement instead of having to group 20 levels of powers together. We wouldn't have to playtest classes, just individual powers... Oh wait, don't a ton of games do that?
what about 3 classes, all with different BAB/HD? But everything else is mutable.
To me it would need to be something like
Full BAB/ No magic
Full BAB/ half caster
3/4th BAB/ No magic
3/4th BAB/ 3/4TH caster
1/2 BAB/ full caster
I would kill the silly 3/4 BAB/ full caster non sense completely
I would kill the silly 3/4 BAB/ full caster non sense completely
I think that would be fine. I played a druid in 3.5 up to 12th level and you know what happened? I stopped fighting in combat. Every round became about what battlefield control spell to use.
double post