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.
Hey, I'm an L5R fan myself- when I want to enjoy asian roleplaying, that's where I go. I just don't think it fits in well here, and while I trust Paizo, I've just got waaaaay too many bad 2nd(and later) ed memories to view ninja and samurai base classes without suspicion.
Dude if I had my way the druid and cleric would still be hurting from the bat, I would have beaten them until they did not look much like they do now.
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.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.
Like Summoners and Oracles and Inquisitors and Alchemists.
Like Summoners and Oracles and Inquisitors and Alchemists.
They are way out of scope to be subclasses or archetypes. They rewrite to much. But stuff like "Ninja" and "samurai" are not even close to the level of reworking any of them would need to be subclasses
An archetype should not take up as much space to explain as a class, all of theses "changes" would need as much space as they use up now. So no they fail as archetypes.
They are way out of scope to be subclasses or archetypes. They rewrite to much. But stuff like "Ninja" and "samurai" are not even close to the level of reworking any of them would need to be subclasses
Like Summoners and Oracles and Inquisitors and Alchemists.
Did your crystal ball inform you of this?
Nah, common sense.
Both classes are just different names used for classes we have now. They have nothing to add, they are the very same classes we have now with minor, very minor changes at most and they use different names for the same weapons we have now with very few really new ones.
Honestly nothing about Ninja or Samurai demands a new class. They can be made now as is, and with minor changes made to fit 100%
All of hose classes you listed needed major changes and brand new mechanics to work. Ya would have to gut every single thing from the current class and nothing at all would say "This was a bard" the only subclass we have is easily seen as it's parent class.
Nah, common sense.
Both classes are just different names used for classes we have now.
Because that's what your crystal ball tells you.
Previous to the release of the Summoner, Alchemist, Inquisitor, Oracle, or Witch classes, why exactly wouldn't you be arguing they could and should be archetype for the Wizard, Paladin, Rogue, Cleric, and Druid?You can't say "this class has nothing to stand alone from already existing classes!" until Paizo makes the class. You are complaining based on nonexistent future knowledge based on pre-bias from 3.5 classes.
umm no,m Lets go though theses ok?
The summoner can not be done with a wizard. You need to
1: Rework his HD/BAB
2: Change his casting progression
3: Change his whole spell list
4: Include the eidolion rules
Inquisitor as a paladin
1: Rework his HD/BAB
2: Change his casting progression
3: New spell list
4: Change every single class ablity he has, to a brand new one with a brand new mechanic
Oracle as a cleric
1: Change his casting progression
2: rework his spell list
3: change all his mechanics to brand new mechanics including the curse
Witch as wizard
1: All new spell list
2: change all class mechanics to brand new class mechanics.
The only ones that even kinda look like subclasses are witches and oracles. And those are outside the bounds on the only example we have of a sub class.
We have examples of archetypes, many of them and one of a subclass. So I am using those. You seem to be ignoring them all.
umm no,m Lets go though theses ok?
The summoner can not be done with a wizard. You need to
1: Rework his HD/BAB
2: Change his casting progression
3: Change his whole spell list
4: Include the eidolion rules
A presumption based on the Summoner class existing as it currently exists. Moreover, there is no reason to presume the existence of an Eidolon for a summoner. In fact, it better fits Conjuration (calling) than it does Conjuration (summoning) so it doesn't fit at all for a summoner but rather for a binder.
Inquisitor as a paladin
[...]
4: Change every single class ablity he has, to a brand new one with a brand new mechanic
A presumption based on the Inquisitor class existing as it currently exists.
Oracle as a cleric
[...]
3: change all his mechanics to brand new mechanics including the curse
A presumption based on the Oracle class existing as it currently exists.
You see where this is going I hope.
Yep I see your going into the "I can't do it" territory.
You can not make the classes the way you said. They are beyond the current known scope of archetypes and subclasses and you know it. Your ignoring the things ya want to and making wild claims you simply can not back up.
You can not make the classes the way you said. They are beyond the current known scope of archetypes and subclasses and you know it. Your ignoring the things ya want to and making wild claims you simply can not back up.
I've had more fruitful debates with a brick wall.
so Have I. All you do is claim things and then can not do what ya claim. I can make a ninja with a rogue{ it has been shown by a few folks at this point" but your saying you can make a class that needs it's own mechanics to work, yet can't do it.
Then you say 'I could make it if I did not have to use the mechanics or make it be like it is now" which is kinda the whole point.
There is simply nothing in ninja or samurai that demands new classes as they do not need new mechanics. The classes you listed all needed new mechanics to work. These do not
I bet you can't make a Ninja with a Rogue based on what abilities and mechanics Paizo might give a Ninja class in the future.
He is saying if paizo hadn't made a class named summoner then you would not be using the Eidolin as an example and a wizard could easily summon creatures as
its focus heck there is augment summon for that exact reason I'd assume. And the new classes need those mechanics because paizo gave them to them. There was no eidolin before paizo gave it to the summoner.
that is where his argument falls apart. The classes are made for those mechanics. Some of them anyhow. The summoner was made for the eidolin, the oracle was made to have it's limits, the inquisitor was built around the new mechanic, the witch was built around having spells from both styles and her hexes.
The classes are built because of the mechanics not the name they have. There is simply no reason to have a new class for what is a current class with a different name.
I am against any new classes, heck I don't think ya need the magues, but enough folks wanted it so there it is, yet the very folks wanting it still want yet another class that does the very same thing..sigh
There is simply zero reason or need for ANY new class, and the Ninja and the samurai have less ground to stand on for a new class then other concepts. They simply have nothing to add that is not already in the game or is not really a minor change to an existing class.
that is where his argument falls apart. The classes are made for those mechanics.
Mechanics that did not previously exist and had no reason to exist
The classes are built because of the mechanics not the name they have. There is simply no reason to have a new class for what is a current class with a different name.
I hate you.
well I love you too, but that does not change that there is zero reason for a new class that is really a current class with a different name.
that is where his argument falls apart. The classes are made for those mechanics.Mechanics that did not previously exist and had no reason to exist
The classes are built because of the mechanics not the name they have. There is simply no reason to have a new class for what is a current class with a different name.I hate you.
well I love you too, but that does not change that there is zero reason for a new class that is really a current class with a different name.
I now pronounce you man and wife.
Seeker, I got you any and everything MW: Dark Ages as a wedding gift. And it is made out of titanium so you can't "accidentally" destroy it.
Have fun, you two! ;-)
Freeholds, even Titanium will not survive a direct PPC blast. And if that doesn't work I can always pull the boards and let the reactor go up. And if that does not work I am willing to glass the planet.
|
I'd agree, a new class isn't necessary, nor would it do justice to the concept "ninja" (and no, I'm not talking about them beeing better, bigger and deadlier).
How about a bunch of class options and feats for different character classes, belonging to a "ninja guild".
A base option for the basics (stealth as aa class scill, ninja weapons) and then options/feats to make your rogue, wizard, alchemist etc. more useful for its guild and specialise him as a "ninja rogue", "ninjs wizard" or "ninja alchemist"?
I'd leave it to the designer and a possible playtest to make sure, these options don't bluntly overpower the base classes, but I have faith that it is possible.
Maybe you play with the base 4 classes, and have people multiclass out from there. More power to you if you do. But some of us like variety. I can see why you may be concerned that Paizo might turn into WoTC and churn out something awful like the book of 9 swords or the 3.5 Ninja, but I have faith they will do the research and create something fun to play with a completely separate flavor you can't get from existing classes.
I actually replaced the 3.5 Ninja class (which originally debuted in Paizo's Dragon Magazine, incidentally, so Paizo did design the 3.5 ninja and everyone who thinks otherwise is silly...) with the Swordsage, because, frankly, it does what an anime-esque ninja should do much better, aside from a few things such as transforming into animals/monsters/elementals.
And a LOT of the stuff I'd expect a fantastical ninja to do (since we're playing a FANTASY game, and not a historical game) cannot be done with the rogue as is - the rogue can't transform into a stone man (Ninja Scroll), teleport (ninja scroll), electrocute people (Ninja Scroll), exude poison from every pore (ninja scroll), turn into a sexy naked woman (Naruto, and I haven't even watched that show...), summon Fu Lions, or transform into wolves. There are many myths and legends, some of them modern and some of them ancient, about what a ninja can do. A rogue can't do even half of those things, even with Major Magic, especially because he can only ever take that talent once, so his magical repertoire will be freaking pathetic and nowhere near appropriate.
D&D is about fantastical adventures. Not historical accuracy. If I wanted a historically accurate ninja, I might just go rogue/monk (for the unarmored stuff). But I want a fantastical ninja. I don't want a character who can do whatever anyone else can do but better. I want a character who can do fantastical things that makes me feel like I've got the whole ninja schtick down. Turning invisible and killing folks with a tanto is only a part of that. Running up vertial walls, clinging to ceilings, disaparating into smoke, mind-control... these are all things that fantastical ninjas should be able to do. The idea of making certain thematic skill sets into different schools your ninja can belong to (like sorcerer bloodlines, cleric domains, wizard schools, or, dare I say it, Oracle mysteries) is a terrific idea.
For the record, also, there is a class for people who shoot ruby beams out of their eyes. It's called the Warlock. The class just gets a lot of other stuff that doesn't necessarily work to keep you in theme as a Summers boy. Warlocks can very easily be comic book super heroes.
If I wanted a realistic ninja I'd play GURPS for one adventure and then everyone dies of disease.
|
transform into a stone man
Stoneskin
teleport
teleport
electrocute people
shocking grasp
exude poison from every pore
?
turn into a sexy naked woman
alter self
summon Fu Lions
summon monster
transform into wolves
beast shape
Turning invisible
invisibility
killing folks with a tanto
Wikipedia tells me this is a knife, rather than some kind of awesome spell.
Running up vertical walls
Spider Climb
clinging to ceilings
Spider Climb
disaparating into smoke
Cloak of the Mountebank
mind-control
dominate
So, a magus archetype with a variant spell-list?
So, a magus archetype with a variant spell-list?
Possibly, if the magus also got an expanded skill list and extra skill ranks.
Also, if the iconic ninja would be better off as a heavily modified magus, then it's really not a rogue archetype, is it? I mean, are we talking about how the rogue should be a fine replacement for a ninja and then there's an argument that a magus would be a fine replacement instead? That just seems like it helps prove the point that it should be maybe its own class, especially if they want to allow people to draw from different "school" lists. Or, at the very least, that the rogue is a poor substitute for the ninja, insofar as it can't use any of those spells beyond one first level spell once per day.
Hell if we get NINJA as a class I am going to demand PIRATES as well!
Seriously, I am also of the opinion that a Ninja can be built perfectly well using the current rogue class. But as I have no intention of buying or playing anything oriental (my group have voted against it). I don't really care if they get their own class, prestige class or are dealt with the same way as the other class options are dealt with in the APG. As long as they are not an over the top, munchkin players, class choice number one as previous incarnations have always been (in my humble opionion).
Pirates are better than Ninjas!
|
|
So, a magus archetype with a variant spell-list?Possibly, if the magus also got an expanded skill list and extra skill ranks.
Also, if the iconic ninja would be better off as a heavily modified magus, then it's really not a rogue archetype, is it? I mean, are we talking about how the rogue should be a fine replacement for a ninja and then there's an argument that a magus would be a fine replacement instead? That just seems like it helps prove the point that it should be maybe its own class, especially if they want to allow people to draw from different "school" lists. Or, at the very least, that the rogue is a poor substitute for the ninja, insofar as it can't use any of those spells beyond one first level spell once per day.
Well, as far as I can tell the restricted spell list is part of the balancing of the magus' power.
We'll have to see how that pans out but if you get a base class, add more spells, more skill points and expand the spell list...You know how some people complain that ninja fans always want them to be uber-classes? I think that might be a temptation here.
I wasn't really trying to make a point about rogues, I was just exploring how your idea of a ninja might function.
The problem with ninjas as their own class is, to my mind, this:
Ninjas are sneaky, skillful people who are good a sneaky killing
Which is a rogue.
Ninjas can also do a whole bunch of awesome magic and supernatural effects.
Which, if you add it to a rogue, is something more powerful.
So, what are we taking away to make a ninja?
Sneak Attack?
Skill Points?
Being good at sneaking?
Hell if we get NINJA as a class I am going to demand PIRATES as well!
Seriously, I am also of the opinion that a Ninja can be built perfectly well using the current rogue class. But as I have no intention of buying or playing anything oriental (my group have voted against it). I don't really care if they get their own class, prestige class or are dealt with the same way as the other class options are dealt with in the APG. As long as they are not an over the top, munchkin players, class choice number one as previous incarnations have always been (in my humble opionion).
** spoiler omitted **
Not to worry, if not Paizo, some 3pp will do a pirates setting and create pirate PC class - that is almost a sure thing.
GP
So, what are we taking away to make a ninja?
Sneak Attack?
Skill Points?
Being good at sneaking?
Some sneaking yes, but Ki power mostly, perhaps Sudden Strike, but not Sneak Attack, skill points - no more than any other class. Ki will be the defining factor.
GP
So, what are we taking away to make a ninja?
Sneak Attack?
Skill Points?
Being good at sneaking?Some sneaking yes, but Ki power mostly, perhaps Sudden Strike, but not Sneak Attack, skill points - no more than any other class. Ki will be the defining factor.
GP
This makes the baby Jesus cry...
this whole its Asian and needs a new class to do the same thing the other classes do now. Makes alot of things cry
I needed PF version ninjas for an adventure I ran in Kaer Maga and I used the Shadow Assassin from GG with a few little tweaks. Worked well enough. There was no TPK but the players still got the gist of what they mysterious class could do, and that they could be anyone.
In that adventure they actually were working for the REd Mantis and didn't know it. The RM still tried to kill them though.
( stop babbling Murphy!...ok).
Hell if we get NINJA as a class I am going to demand PIRATES as well!
I guess you haven't heard about the Pathfinder version of the Freeport Companion from Green Ronin have you?
and we need a pirate archetype for every single class. We can't limit pirate options and we need a magical pirate subclass. Sure pirates had no magic but ninja's had no magic ether..its a fantasy game right. Full BAB, all good saves and at lest 6 levels of casting sounds right for the pirate class. Oh and an animal companion and favored ship.
this whole its Asian and needs a new class to do the same thing the other classes do now. Makes alot of things cry
But I don't think 'its Asian so we need a new class' - most of the needed classes either already exist, or can use archetypes to do them. Some classes like ninja fall into some categories, but can't best fit as an ninja without its own class.
You could make a 'sort of' ninja from a rogue, or from a sorcerer or monk, but none of those three depict a ninja well.
Really I think ninja is the only new class needed in such a setting.
Regarding 'baby jesus crying' - ah, I guess he's been crying for 10 years since ninja has always had Sudden Strike and never Sneak Attack, at least so since 3x. Besides why steal the rogues class feature?
Besides Japan had other criminal types, many sorts of burglars, outlawas (nobushi), pirates (wako), so rogues are already in the setting. So should all criminals of an oriental setting be a ninja? No. Ninja is for a specific thing, a rogue is for something else and still greatly needed. Calling a rogue a ninja would only add confusion.
GP
and we need a pirate archetype for every single class. We can't limit pirate options and we need a magical pirate subclass. Sure pirates had no magic but ninja's had no magic ether..its a fantasy game right. Full BAB, all good saves and at lest 6 levels of casting sounds right for the pirate class. Oh and an animal companion and favored ship.
Except, of course, that there were far fewer myths and legends about a pirate's magical nature than there are about ninjas. NO ONE is asking for a ninja to have "full BAB, all good saves, and at least 6 levels of casting," for the ninja or the pirate.
What several of us have suggested is that there's a lot more to the mythical, fantastical ninja than a garrote, tanto, and black pajamas. And a lot of it cannot be done with the rogue by itself. Much of it couldn't be done with any class in the game without some terrible multiclass cludge. And, frankly, I like it when I can play a character who's like what I envision from early levels, rather than having to wait until 10th level, three classes, and a prestige class to finally feel like I'm playing the concept that I want. If I want to be a supernatural stealth assassin, I shouldn't have to wade through levels of wizard and rogue to get to arcane trickster, especially if a lot of the stuff I pick up along the way isn't even remotely like what I'm looking for.
Two years ago, if you'd asked someone whether or not there should be an alchemist class, there would have been no expectation of a Mr. Hyde potion drinking, explosives throwing, personal-range-only spellcaster. But, now we've got one, and you don't see people throwing tantrums that it isn't an alchemist. Right now, you're asking whether or not there should be a ninja class, and you're answering "there's a rogue, and that's all we need." Two years from now, maybe there'll be an actual ninja class, capable of replicating the fantastical nature of the mythical ninja, and we'll all look at it and go "yep. That's how a ninja should look. No way you could do that with a rogue." But they'd still be balanced against each other.
Maybe the ninja doesn't get full SA progression. Maybe they have to expend ki points to do so. Maybe they have Death Attack at low-ish levels. Maybe they have different schools/families that allow them to channel their ki in different ways, one path allowing them to transform into animals, while another allows them to teleport through shadows, and another that allows them to walk on walls and leap tall buildings in a single bound.
Maybe. But I know that I couldn't pull off those abilities with the core Rogue. Because a rogue can get all of one 1st level spell as a spell-like ability 2/day. That's it. So I could walk on walls twice per day, but forget about turning myself invisible. Or I could turn invisible, but forget about walking on walls. And there's absolutely no way to jump through the shadow realm, or transform into a monster, or anything else.
Bottom line is, to get a fantastical ninja, you'd need a hybrid of something like sorcerer/rogue/monk or druid/rogue/monk or something even crazier. And Paizo fans seem inherently opposed to the idea of multiclassing at all, let alone multiclassing into three or more classes, with maybe a dash of PrC (Shadowdancer) without taking more than a level or two in it. So a base class would really be the best way to ensure that the ninja lives up to the general conception of the myth without either being excessively gimped or requiring serious amounts of system mastery, non-core books, and hand-waivy reflavoring.
But I'd be okay with replacing the name "ninja" with something like "wuxia skirmisher" or something like that, since then you can divorce a little bit of the national cultural baggage and allow it to better replicate the entire continent's myths, rather than just one island nation.
You could make a 'sort of' ninja from a rogue, or from a sorcerer or monk, but none of those three depict a ninja well.
GP
There is no sorta. You can make what 8 out of 10 people would describe as a pure ninja from the rogue as it stands now. If you want shapshiting or caster level which are not common ninja tropes ya can multiclass or use a PRC.
If I was to file off the rogue name, replace the weapons with Asian named weapons and show that class as is to a player who had not seen the rogue they would go..cool a ninja.
seekerofshadowlight vehemently opposes listening to any reasonable argument on this subject and when presented with one both ignores it and spouts off strawmen. There is no point pretending he is valid member of the debate.
what reasonable argument? Because they are ninja and there for need a new class is not a reasonable argument. It has been shown how the rogue is a ninja, it has been shown how the rogue can even use what you guys are calling "classic ninja magic"
There is no debate here, all ya got is "but its a ninja!" while ignoring the ninja tricks are already in the game. You want a new class because you want one, it has zero to do with "making a ninja" as if that was the case a simple archetype works 100% with what is commonly thought of as a ninja.
what reasonable argument? Because they are ninja and there for need a new class is not a reasonable argument. It has been shown how the rogue is a ninja, it has been shown how the rogue can even use what you guys are calling "classic ninja magic"
There is no debate here, all ya got is "but its a ninja!" while ignoring the ninja tricks are already in the game. You want a new class because you want one, it has zero to do with "making a ninja" as if that was the case a simple archetype works 100% with what is commonly thought of as a ninja.
And you have blatantly refused to acknowledge any argument that points out that classes added in the APG are completely different than what one would have presupposed them to be. And the only time you did bother to accept that fact, you intentionally obfuscated the argument with blatant obtuseness.
And moreover, this:
There is no debate here, all ya got is "but its a ninja!"
Is a strawman.
I'm cool with either a completely new class or an archetype of rogue. Either one will work.
Is a strawman.
So you say but use them yourself then say ignore me when I do not agree we need a new class just because it is a ninja.
An outfit is not enough to base a class on. What they do is already covered by a class.
An outfit is not enough to base a class on. What they do is already covered by a class.
All I read was "I ignored the multitude of arguments pointing out how the Summoner, Oracle, Alchemist, Inquisitor, and Witch are nothing like what some one unfamiliar with the classes in the APG would think they were. Again."
While I am not against a spcific ninja class, I hope we get archetypes for the Alchemist, Bard, Inquisitor, Monk, Ranger, and Rogue, as well as a Sorcerer bloodline that would let those classes function in a ninja-like role.
The alchemist could cover the explosives, poisons, and "internal alchemy" types. The Bard makes for the perfect court spy. The inquisitor could serve as the "bounty hunter" type. The monk and rogue fill obvious roles. The ranger works well for the military spy type ninja.
apples to oranges. Each of those class was conceived and created to showcase its mechanics. Each one of those was created to have the mechanic is has, it was made for that mechanic and to fill a nitch that was not yet filled..
The"ninja" is being asked for to showcase a name and a pair of jammys. The nitch it fills has a class already filling it. Your not starting with the mechanics your starting only with a name and outfit then making up new mechanics so it wont be what it is. To try and scream "see not a rogue!" .
The role the ninja fills has a class. So it is pointless to start over and make it different when all ya need to do is use the class already there. Even mechanically it fits the ninja for everyone but the few claiming ninja's are spell caster and shapshifter.
The common image of a ninja is not a caster or a shapeshifter. But a rogue by another name in black pajamas's doing rogue stuff.
what reasonable argument? Because they are ninja and there for need a new class is not a reasonable argument. It has been shown how the rogue is a ninja, it has been shown how the rogue can even use what you guys are calling "classic ninja magic"
There is no debate here, all ya got is "but its a ninja!" while ignoring the ninja tricks are already in the game. You want a new class because you want one, it has zero to do with "making a ninja" as if that was the case a simple archetype works 100% with what is commonly thought of as a ninja.
A rogue has Sneak Attack, Find Traps, and Rogue Talents - a ninja doesn't need any of those, so a rogue does not make an ideal Ninja. Stealth? Any class can take stealth, that isn't dependant on being a rogue.
Manga ninja might need shape-change, but manga doesn't belong in most fantasy settings. I don't think a ninja should have shape-change personally.
Ki pool and ki powers would completely fill what a ninja needs 'magically', just there currently aren't enough ki powers - which I intend to fix. To me, a ninja is more a specialized kind of monk and not a rogue at all. Monk class gets stealth and perceptions as class skills. They get buffs to movement and slow fall, evasion - all this sounds much closer to a ninja, but useful to a rogue as well.
The killing skills, ki powers, some alchemical training, use of poisons, special movement on walls, on ceilings, shadow jumping are more intrinsically ninja, and doesn't have anything to do with a rogue.
A rogue does not make an ideal ninja, perhaps a sidekick, nothing more.
GP
There is no sorta. You can make what 8 out of 10 people would describe as a pure ninja from the rogue as it stands now. If you want shapshiting or caster level which are not common ninja tropes ya can multiclass or use a PRC.Fortunately 7 out of 10 people realise that 9 out of 10 statistics presented in ninja debates are made up.
It's perfectly fine that you don't want a Ninja base class, I get that. But you don't need to make up statistics to support your argument. Looking at this thread there are obviously a decent number of people who don't think that the Rogue class provides all the tools needed to make what they see as a ninja. I have no idea what proportion of the population that opinion represents. Unless you've been running out to conduct surveys during this debate you don't either. Different people have different ideas about what a ninja is, just as different people have different ideas over what a summoner is or an alchemist or Batman's alignment.
You also realize that "But they made a <insert any new APG class here>!!" is a piss poor argument for ninja (or any other stereotypical asian meme) having it's own full base class.
You also realize that "But they made a <insert any new APG class here>!!" is a piss poor argument for ninja (or any other stereotypical asian meme) having it's own full base class.
And the argument that "The Rogue can hide and attack people!" is a god awful argument for a Ninja archetype instead of a full class since you have no idea what abilities a full class would have.