Your entitled to your opinion, but ya see I am not the only one who seems to share mine. The fact is if you Ignore what paizo has called it, they are what they are mechanically.
I happen to like the samurai just the way he is mostly and do not want to seem him transformed into something else. He fits the historical samurai well and there is no need to call him anything but what he is because the name he has.
Him being an archetype does not make it any less cool or Asian or fun to play. I do not want to see him transformed into something else to justify the alt class name when he works as is.
Couple of quick notes here to the crowd.
1 - Cha will always be an important stat to the Ninja. Remember that part of the ninja's role was infiltration, which often included disguises and pretending to be someone you're not. Seeing as it is also a measure of your force of will, it does make some sense as a Ki stat. We are, as usual, open to debate on the issue. I know that MAD is a problem with the ninja at the moment.
2 - Folks need to remember that an alt class is really just an expanded archtype. The differences are pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. So much so, that we are seriously looking at the definitions of the two due to all the confusion.
3 - We are cognizant of some balance issues, but are looking for more actual playtest feedback. I know the ki pool looks a lot better than evasion, but I could use some more actual feedback on the difference. This is why we playtest.
That is all.. carry on.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
This really has nothing to do with this thread and I have not even read it other than this post.
I just wanted to comment on # 2 I like the fact of alt class and would like to see these 3 alt classes appear in ultimate combat in the format of the base classes just like the antipalidan did. I think it is easier to read then the archtypes and plus they get a awesome picture of the class.
|
1 - Cha will always be an important stat to the Ninja. Remember that part of the ninja's role was infiltration, which often included disguises and pretending to be someone you're not. Seeing as it is also a measure of your force of will, it does make some sense as a Ki stat. We are, as usual, open to debate on the issue. I know that MAD is a problem with the ninja at the moment.
...[snip]...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I think it is somewhat disingenuous to attempt to walk a line between the fantastical ninja and the historical ninja with a class dubbed 'ninja.' If you are really playing this card and building an alt-class specifically for the ninja archetype, than you are talking about the fantastical, popular ninja. The kind of ninja that does not speak.
If you were not going for this sort of ninja, than the rogue, ranger and/or monk would already cover the whole domain of the historical ninja. There is no need for the historical ninja to be represented by alternate features, because it is already possible to build one. A talking and infiltrating ninja is not a "steps into shadows and/or is invisible" ninja. And those playing the mystic warrior ninja may still invest in Charisma to help out those useful skill ranks they are swimming in.
+1 to the "Wisdom, not Charisma for ki" side of the argument. Anyone playing an infiltrator may already play a straight rogue and put their points in Charisma. The only sort of cliched 'ninja' work that such a character might have difficulty performing would be the magical powers attributed to ninja. And, depending on who you talk to, martial prowess.
My own playtest was meant to happen this evening, but has been pushed back. Will post after Tuesday when it has happened.
The problem, Ciretose, is that Pathfinder hates multi-classing.
lies. Pathfinder has made multi-classing much easier.
Anyway. I'v been giving the Ninja some thought and I have changed my mind some what. The Ninja isn't that bad. It needs some nerfs and the rogue needs a few boosts. As long as they keep Char as the Ki stat it it will be fine (if they nerf it some). Or as magnuskn put it in another tread:
"Ki points through charisma are fine, IMO, and create another balancing factor for stat allocation, which itself helps balance the Ninja against the Rogue."
I think it is somewhat disingenuous to attempt to walk a line between the fantastical ninja and the historical ninja with a class dubbed 'ninja.' If you are really playing this card and building an alt-class specifically for the ninja archetype, than you are talking about the fantastical, popular ninja. The kind of ninja that does not speak.
No, they do speak. Storm Shadow, Dr. McNinja, Shadow, Edge, etc are all ninja that speak. Shadow just speaks rarely.
The only one that doesn't speak is Snake eyes because of his vow of failure.
lies. Pathfinder has made multi-classing much easier.
The problem, Ciretose, is that Pathfinder hates multi-classing.
Besides the inherent opposition to it.
|
|
I think it is somewhat disingenuous to attempt to walk a line between the fantastical ninja and the historical ninja with a class dubbed 'ninja.' If you are really playing this card and building an alt-class specifically for the ninja archetype, than you are talking about the fantastical, popular ninja. The kind of ninja that does not speak.
No, they do speak. Storm Shadow, Dr. McNinja, Shadow, Edge, etc are all ninja that speak. Shadow just speaks rarely.
The only one that doesn't speak is Snake eyes because of his vow of failure.
They don't speak much. And they certainly don't come off as charismatic.
Except McNinja. But that's a strange, strange story and representing that game with Pathfinder or any D&D variant would be ... tricky.
You're all wrong.
3.5 made multiclassing stupid.
Pathfinder helps people keep clear of it unless they REALLY know what they are doing.
Well, if my players know that they'll not reach lvl 20, like with an AP, they quite often multiclass, and there is not much which the game does against it. The favoured class bonus, yes, but picking up additional class skills alone makes up for that, IMO.
Besides the inherent opposition to it.lies. Pathfinder has made multi-classing much easier.
The problem, Ciretose, is that Pathfinder hates multi-classing.
Inherent opposition or not. It's not a problem. They made it easier to multi class.
I do not expect alot of support for ninja by itself in future products, there probably will be rogue talents the ninja will be able to pick though be it on a limited scale, that works fine with me, having a list of ninja skills that you can take is a fair way to balance all the super stuff people EXPECT a ninja to be able to do. Personally I do not want every rogue to have that ninja flavor, so I am against having the same list for both classes.
I hope they get rid of the invisible blade trick in this form, just using invisibility as a swift action for 1 round, enough time to move and hide, would have been awesome already, perhaps with a non-detection effect allowing for a caster level check to detect the ninja. A little more balancing work on some other ki abilities, and reduce skill points to 6 per level, and the ninja is fine.
My first thoughts on a ninja were that it was better than a rouge. A PC in my campaign played one, switched from a rouge and it seemed to be a lot better in terms of how it played IN COMBAT. But the party almost died out of combat because it couldn't find traps, so I think it losing trap finding makes a huge difference. The ninja also took alot of damage from fireballs that it normally wouldn't have taken any damage from.
I would like to see this as a base class just so one could get more sneak attack than 1 per 2 lvls and I feel they could do more for this class. I liked that in 3.5 I could get 3d6 sneak at lvl 3 without variants albeit at the cost of BAB (rouge, Spell thief and ninja(sudden strike)). I don't think this would break the game.
It feels like a more combat oriented rouge to me but I used them as npcs for combat once. I feel that restricting the talents to ninja only are not that good of an idea unless this is it's own class
Technically, in 3.5, if you multiclassed as those three classes, you should have a 2d6 sneak attack. When calculating sneak attack, you total all levels in all classes that have them. The only exception was Ninja, since Ninja had Sudden Strike, not Sneak Attack, and Scout, since they had Skirmish and not Sneak attack.
Technically, in 3.5, if you multiclassed as those three classes, you should have a 2d6 sneak attack. When calculating sneak attack, you total all levels in all classes that have them. The only exception was Ninja, since Ninja had Sudden Strike, not Sneak Attack, and Scout, since they had Skirmish and not Sneak attack.My first thoughts on a ninja were that it was better than a rouge. A PC in my campaign played one, switched from a rouge and it seemed to be a lot better in terms of how it played IN COMBAT. But the party almost died out of combat because it couldn't find traps, so I think it losing trap finding makes a huge difference. The ninja also took alot of damage from fireballs that it normally wouldn't have taken any damage from.
I would like to see this as a base class just so one could get more sneak attack than 1 per 2 lvls and I feel they could do more for this class. I liked that in 3.5 I could get 3d6 sneak at lvl 3 without variants albeit at the cost of BAB (rouge, Spell thief and ninja(sudden strike)). I don't think this would break the game.
It feels like a more combat oriented rouge to me but I used them as npcs for combat once. I feel that restricting the talents to ninja only are not that good of an idea unless this is it's own class
I don't think so. Prestige classes stacked but I don't recall other classes stacking.