Samurai didn't use shields typicly. Maybe a parry/riposte mechanic from the duelist should be added?
I agree on both points. No shields at all and the weapons mentioned are on. The katana was most often worn edge down on the battle field in the tachi manner. When dismounted the prefered weapon was the Yari (long spear). It was not until Japan was unified and no longer was there anyone to fight,due to the closed boaders, that the image of the katana wielding duelist began to emerge.
|
Samurai didn't use shields... but maybe an exotic weapon proficiency with tessen (war fan). With it they could parry (mechanically like a buckler or light shiel) or atack (spiked light shield [slashing damage])
From wiki:
Tessen (鉄扇?) were folding fans with outer spokes made of heavy plates of iron which were designed to look like normal, harmless folding fans or solid clubs shaped to look like a closed fan. Samurai could take these to places where swords or other overt weapons were not allowed, and some swordsmanship schools included training in the use of the tessen as a weapon. The tessen was also used for fending off arrows and darts, as a throwing weapon, and as an aid in swimming.[3]
and
wiki (Uesugi Kenshin)
(...)In this battle is the tale of Kenshin riding up to Shingen and slashing at him with his sword. Shingen fended off the blows with his iron war fan or tessen.
You guys seem to forget not everyone who uses this is gonna play a samurai. Leaving the shield in is fine as it hurts nothing, effects nothing and allows someone to build a heavy shield character that happens to use the samurai without being a "samurai"
You guys seem to forget not everyone who uses this is gonna play a samurai. Leaving the shield in is fine as it hurts nothing, effects nothing and allows someone to build a heavy shield character that happens to use the samurai without being a "samurai"
This.
|
|
You guys seem to forget not everyone who uses this is gonna play a samurai. Leaving the shield in is fine as it hurts nothing, effects nothing and allows someone to build a heavy shield character that happens to use the samurai without being a "samurai"
Then the name "samurai" is a little bit inappropriate. If not everyone who uses the samurai class is gonna play a samurai...it´s difficult to ignore historical roots of the word (even in a fantasy world)
|
You guys seem to forget not everyone who uses this is gonna play a samurai. Leaving the shield in is fine as it hurts nothing, effects nothing and allows someone to build a heavy shield character that happens to use the samurai without being a "samurai"
I understand your opinion that a class need not to be limited inside the boundary of its naming concept, especially, if that class is gereic enough like, the Fighter, the Cleric, or the Thief and so on, whose concept is able to accept wide variety.
Nevertheless, then what the point to bring a particular substitute class to an existing one here? For instance, I guess you would be able to put a Fighter to almost any kind of hitorical or fictional contexts. But would you do the same, say, for a Gunslinger? You don't mind a Gunslinger having some proficieny of shields insead of having other features that fit much better to the Gunslinger concept, as she's a fighter, and as not everybody uses her as a gunslinger?
If any existing or established concepts surrounding a given substitute class are not considered and examined well, why bother make such specific one?
Just my 2 cents. No offense meant :)
Then the name "samurai" is a little bit inappropriate. If not everyone who uses the samurai class is gonna play a samurai...it´s difficult to ignore historical roots of the word (even in a fantasy world)
Nope, not even one who plays a monk plays an Asian mystic, or a ranger a woodsmen or a barbarian as a well barbaric northmen. I plan to use the samurai archetype and have no intention what so ever of him being a "samurai" In fact, he is gonna be order of the star with no Asian influence at all in character.
Names are just fluff for many games.
Nevertheless, then what the point to bring a particular substitute class to an existing one here? ?
The point was, for me, a Cavalier able to shrug off effects and be so stalwart and stubborn to reroll saves, attack rolls and his honor above the fact that he just took a critical hit.
I love this modeled on Samurai and I think that it fits. In some game of mine Samurai will be a Samurai.
In other games, Samurai will be a Knight of [Insert Order], or a member of the Imperial Guard.
I love this modeled on Samurai and I think that it fits. In some game of mine Samurai will be a Samurai.
In other games, Samurai will be a Knight of [Insert Order], or a member of the Imperial Guard.
This. Are all rogues thieves after all?
|
|
This. Are all rogues thieves after all?I love this modeled on Samurai and I think that it fits. In some game of mine Samurai will be a Samurai.
In other games, Samurai will be a Knight of [Insert Order], or a member of the Imperial Guard.
While I love that kind of gaming concepts, too, somewhat I do hope the class's name changed from Samurai to more generic one, in line with a ranger, a cleric, a rogue etc., if used so "fluffy."
If a class's name is just fluff, even in the course of its design process, then the concepts of that name should also be fluffy, too, to avoid making some people bound to the name's specific notions, IMHO.
As for a monk, a ranger, or a barbarian, you can "grasp" the concepts or notions of these classes' names, as they are somewhat traditional words and notions in English, and are generic enough to convey vairous cultural concepts. You need not to image a monk as a Shaolin wushu warrior monk, as you can also find various kinds of other monk architypes in other religious heritages elsewhere even in the real world, occidental or oriental.
But, I think, one can't say the same thing for a loan word such as samurai, 'cause that name's notions are still too culturally and historically bound in its context.
Actually, I guess, not small amount of people from the Japanese ancestory, would feel disdained if the term Samurai is used without some extent of respect to its heritage. In that sense, it's not like ninja, which has been told and fictionalized largely in mystical and fantasied contexts even in Japan.
(Sigh...writing in a non-native language is a tough thing.)
The issue is..it is an Archetype, people are thinking it is a base class based off them calling it an alt class of a caviler and how it is presented as a full write up. Which is the wall you seem to be hitting.
But change wise and word count wise it is just an archetype for the caviler class. Once you just see it as simply the name for a flavorful archetype for another class, most of that goes away.
Think of it as a caviler, which is what it is.
The issue is..it is an Archetype, people are thinking it is a base class based off them calling it an alt class of a caviler and how it is presented as a full write up. Which is the wall you seem to be hitting.
But change wise and word count wise it is just an archetype for the caviler class. Once you just see it as simply the name for a flavorful archetype for another class, most of that goes away.
Think of it as a caviler, which is what it is.
This. Cavalier --> nobleman who hit things with his sword/lance/whatever and has abilities related to his honor, morale, command ability and stuff. For what we have seen 'til now, has a mount.
Samurai ---> Cavalier Archetype.
|
|
The issue is..it is an Archetype, people are thinking it is a base class based off them calling it an alt class of a caviler and how it is presented as a full write up. Which is the wall you seem to be hitting.
But change wise and word count wise it is just an archetype for the caviler class. Once you just see it as simply the name for a flavorful archetype for another class, most of that goes away.
Think of it as a caviler, which is what it is.
This. Cavalier --> nobleman who hit things with his sword/lance/whatever and has abilities related to his honor, morale, command ability and stuff. For what we have seen 'til now, has a mount.
Samurai ---> Cavalier Archetype.
Thanks for your replies. Maybe the term "samurai" in English has already come to be generically architypical among fantasy gaming activities these days? I don't know. But I'm willing to see how this substitute class will be refined through playtesting into the final version. I have my faith in people here at Paizo ;-)
[Edit] oops, I wrote this post reading reviews and partial translations of APG and the UC playtest in Japanese, but have just found that there's no such a term "substitute class" in the APG nor in the playtest pdf file. (...blushed) ...Alternate Classes...Archetypes, I see, gonna read through APG and the playtest file precisely and will come back.
Maybe it's because golarion samurai use shields.
Maybe they are more warrior-esque and less into calligraphy, noh, and other forms of education.
The development of the samurai warrior class could have easily happened differently on this world. The samurai didnt use shields on earth, primarily because they were so far away from anyone who did.
Samurai originating out of Tian Xia have alot more opportunity to come into conflict with other cultures using shields, and may have adapted the use of them, as earth samurai adapted the use of firearms once they came into being.
Although the mental image of samurai with a shield says less fluid and flashy, but thats a misnomer as the oyori was an incredibly inflexible armor, like full plate and is mainly the reason why the yari was so popular when suited like that, because of the heavy/inflexible armor.
So our idea in our heads of dual wielding samurai dancing around in oyoroi is just as fictitious as dragons. If I was going to fight a dragon i think I'd want a shield too.
The Samurai alternate class should have the flavour of the Samurai and not use shields.
UC will have archetypes for the Cav and that where you will find the broad range of differing cavaliers to suit your Imperial Guard, Cossack, and so on.
I see no point in diluting an iconic warrior because somebody wants to have special pleading for their homebrew world.
Wait for the archetypes for the Cavalier and if what you want is not in there, hassle JB and others to make one.
I would like a version of the Alkenstar Light Horse based on the Australian Light horse Who were essentially mounted riflemen or mobile infantry.
More just because, seems to be a theme with these two. Ok mostly just the ninja, the sam is pretty good.
More just because, seems to be a theme with these two. Ok mostly just the ninja, the sam is pretty good.
You really don't like the ninja do you?
Stronger then the rogue? maybe, stronger then any other class? no not really, don't blame the ninja for the rogues faults. Don't downgrade the ninja lets hope UC upgrades the rogue.
On the samurai, losing heavy shields wouldn't change much but people seem to always want every option (why martial weapons haven't been given to wizards yet I'll never know) but, since letting them keep them isn't a huge deal, it may as well stay.
Do I outright hate the ninja? No, do I think it was given better rogue talents rogues could not have because it was called a ninja? Dame right.
It needs work, the tricks need rolled into talents, they need rebalanced and ki needs some reworking a little bit as they gain it awful low.
All in all it isn't bad, but there are some huge issue with it. You keep saying buff the rogue, yet the ninja just barred him from having cool mystic trick as good as he does..ever.
Do I outright hate the ninja? No, do I think it was given better rogue talents rogues could not have because it was called a ninja? Dame right.
It needs work, the tricks need rolled into talents, they need rebalanced and ki needs some reworking a little bit as they gain it awful low.
All in all it isn't bad, but there are some huge issue with it. You keep saying buff the rogue, yet the ninja just barred him from having cool mystic trick as good as he does..ever.
Rogues don't need mystical powers and should remain one of the classes without them (theres only three really). Artificial buffing because your biased toward rogues and European classes isn't what i had in mind when I said buff the rogue.
Lets get creative with the rogue and leave the ninja alone.
The rogue already has them, yet then ninja cherry picked the rogues talents and then got ones that laughed at his list, because ya know it was Asian so had to have better mystic talents. But now only one type of mystic rogue can ever be made, the ninja.
And many of those talents are not unique to ninja's to start with.
The trick/talent wall has to go.
oh i agree samurai should not get shields at all for free.
I was just saying maybe.
with that said they dont have as good a charge as the cav, they arent as good with mounts as the cav, and their order abilities seem weaker.
So I do think they loose something for the free bastard sword proficiency.
But Im not a fan of their shields.... I just said...'maybe'
|
|
The samurai didnt use shields on earth, primarily because they were so far away from anyone who did.
I'm afraid it's not. As some portion of Japanese ruling groups are descended from immigrants from the continent where soldiers used shields, the soldiers of ancient Japan used shields, as you can see in historical records and in the costume of Gagaku, the ancient ceremonial court music and dance of millenarian tradition.
But when it turns to the medieval ages ruled under the samurai lords and the shogunate, soldiers (i.e. samurai) focused and specialized their skills into two-handed weapons including swords, bows and polearms, so the use of wielding shields become fewer and eventually died out (btw there were some records that their arrows and swords could puncture and slash shields at that time).
So, IIRC, samurai didn't use shields as they think them unfunctional and cumbersome for using two-handed weapons.
And instead, armors developed more, and samurai began to use shields not as those wielded by hands/arms, but as barriers fixed on the earth against enemy's arrows and charges. And in the advent of guns in the battle fields, they were replaced by bamboo barriers which were more efficient against bullets and easy to carry and craft.
If you'd like to know the concise information on history of shields in Japan, I'd recommend you to check Shields in Wikipedia (though unfortunately) in Japanese.
|
|
By the way, if samurai were primarily two-handed weapon soliders, then what the use of their wakizashi was for?
It's for a backup in case his two-handed sword was broken, and for indoor use in respect of spatial convenience. And the blade was shorter, easier to behead his enemy's body as the proof of his valor, though not necessarily with wakizashi. And in the Edo Era, wearing daisho, or tachi [edit: correction, should be "uchigatana", not tachi, sorry] (two-handed katana) and wakizashi represented one's being samurai, and they were given permission to wear wakizashi even within the shogun's palace, IIRC.
Just FYR.
One explanation I heard about how samurai not using shields (I think it was in some L5R material) was that those katana were too damn sharp to make shields viable. What good is a shield if your enemy just cuts it in two with his first strike (probably along with your arm)?
If you consider "backwards compatibility" with the OA samurai (not quite the right term here, I know), it makes sense, too, since they also only had medium armour and no shields unless my memory is messing with me again. I don't know about the Complete Warrior samurai, but that was crap, anyway.
Finally, balancing reasons make it a good idea to keep the heavy armour and shield proficiencies away from the samurai, since the class gets some exotic weapon proficiencies (I assume they're going to turn the "samurai weapons" like naginata and katana into exotic weapons, or it would not have been necessary to add them to the proficiency list on top of all martial weapons) the original class doesn't get.
I think that these are good changes for this class variant. After all, it's more than just an archetype, so they can do more extensive changes. For that reason, it's a good idea to leave it as a variant rather than turn it into an archetype.
|
|
Yep but heres the rub... the early Japanese hadnt mastered Katana smithing. They had crappy quality straight blades... so you can have Weapon Proficiency Katana or you can have shield.We all keep arguing about the iconic samurai - I'll submit that yes, go back far enough and he was a mounted archer, cool. But lets not dreg back beyond all that.
By the time the practice of Katana making was flourishing and Japanese distinctive styles of swordsmanship were starting to evolve, the shield was dead to the Samurai.
Thanks for your reply. I agree and second your opinion. I mentioned the early Japanese, to say that samurai didn't use shields NOT because they were so far away from anyone who did.
; )[Edit] And I'd add "and two-handed weapon soldier" to your "he was a mounted archer."
[Edit2] So, my take on samurai Cavalier variant concept is: a Cavalier with honor codes and loyalty to his order/clan, proficient with two-hand wielding weapons (longblades, longbows, polearms etc.) and armors (no shields).
They kind of incorporated shields into their armor, the sode.
By the way, if samurai were primarily two-handed weapon soliders, then what the use of their wakizashi was for?
It's for a backup in case his two-handed sword was broken, and for indoor use in respect of spatial convenience. And the blade was shorter, easier to behead his enemy's body as the proof of his valor, though not necessarily with wakizashi. And in the Edo Era, wearing daisho, or tachi [edit: correction, should be "uchigatana", not tachi, sorry] (two-handed katana) and wakizashi represented one's being samurai, and they were given permission to wear wakizashi even within the shogun's palace, IIRC.
Just FYR.
wakizashi was for seppku, apparently
The samurai didnt use shields on earth, primarily because they were so far away from anyone who did.
I'm afraid it's not. As some portion of Japanese ruling groups are descended from immigrants from the continent where soldiers used shields, the soldiers of ancient Japan used shields, as you can see in historical records and in the costume of Gagaku, the ancient ceremonial court music and dance of millenarian tradition.
But when it turns to the medieval ages ruled under the samurai lords and the shogunate, soldiers (i.e. samurai) focused and specialized their skills into two-handed weapons including swords, bows and polearms, so the use of wielding shields become fewer and eventually died out (btw there were some records that their arrows and swords could puncture and slash shields at that time).
Yep but heres the rub... the early Japanese hadnt mastered Katana smithing. They had crappy quality straight blades... so you can have Weapon Proficiency Katana or you can have shield.
We all keep arguing about the iconic samurai - I'll submit that yes, go back far enough and he was a mounted archer, cool. But lets not dreg back beyond all that.
By the time the practice of Katana making was flourishing and Japanese distinctive styles of swordsmanship were starting to evolve, the shield was dead to the Samurai.
Samurais first swords were tachi, two handed. Then Uchigatana which came in two lengths (the first daisho) then katana and wakizashi.
None of these were "straight" blades... as time went on, the blades got straighter, actually. It has something to do with the quenching process.
The blades are forged straight and then the difference in material purity while quenching causes a slight (or drastic) curve.
Japanese metal was really crappy, thats why so much care hand to go into sword smithing. Japanese swords werent made from the finest materials by the best craftsman, thats all balderdash.
Their metal was so crappy that they had to work extra hard to make a sword that was better than a club. and then ended up doing a good job.
If you look at the swords through out time, the ones with thee most curve in them are the older ones, (tachi) but heck for us white guys they all look like katanas. Alot of older pictures show what we think is a katana being weidled two handed, it's not. it's a tachi.
A proper katana blade is only 27 inches (plus or minus) long. thats not a huge blade.
More modern ones are much straighter because quenching has been perfected.
|
|
wakizashi was for seppku, apparently
IIRC, usually, nope. In a formal situation, a short katana is specially prepared as part of the ceremony to perform "self determination."
If a samurai should use his wakizashi to do his "self determination," then I guess it's something like in a desperate situation after losing a battle and on the way of his fleeing, without any hope of having formal preparation.
|
|
Yep but heres the rub... the early Japanese hadnt mastered Katana smithing. They had crappy quality straight blades... so you can have Weapon Proficiency Katana or you can have shield.Samurais first swords were tachi, two handed. Then Uchigatana which came in two lengths (the first daisho) then katana and wakizashi.
None of these were "straight" blades... as time went on, the blades got straighter, actually. It has something to do with the quenching process.
While your reference to the set of swords for samurai is pretty correct, I guess Helaman's mention was referring to the pre-samurai ages (i.e. sometime in the Heian Era or earlier), when the swords were actually straight in Japan. IIRC.
Just my 2 cents.
Actually when the Heian Period emperors wanted to expand their territories, they looked north which was land held by Emishi barbarians. The Emishi used curved blades and long bows while mounted, while the Japanese used straight blades and at the time weren't really cavalry. After getting beaten time and time again by the marauding Emishi, the Japanese began to adopt their weapons, horses and fighting techniques. The Emishi were raiders and never fought toe to toe, rather sweeping attacks from their mounts.
In a way its like Romans and Celts. The Romans being better organized, trained and motivated were like the Heian Period Japanese, whereas the Emishi were much like the Celts being well armed and armored, but not professional warriors rather locals fighting for their cause.
The Japanese adapted Emishi weapons and perfected them - this is where the tachi, katana, and yumi bow came from, as well as 'the way of the horse'. Horses are primarily raised on the Kanto Plain and lands north.
Samurai, specifically, never used straight swords. They began their samurai-ness using yari (spears) yumi (bows) and naginata. Once swords came on the scene they were the Tachi (which looks like a katana but it's bigger) which was two handed.
So samurai never used straight swords.
As I said earlier, the tachi gave way to uchigatana (which still looks like a katana to me I can't tell the difference in pictures) and then the katana, which is relatively the modern samurai sword.
Many older pictures depicting samurai using the 'katana' two handed, is more than likely actually the tachi. The actual katana is not that big of a weapon.
As the samurai move along in their history, the type of combat changed, their armor got lighter and their swords got quicker. They moved away from the face mask thing to no face mask at all because they needed greater range of vision.
So whens peaking specifically about samurai, there were never any straight swords (or shields) for that matter.
If there were straight swords in japan in use prior to the samurai, I don't know anything about it.
I don't think they stopped using the mempo (face mask) as it was a core part of Japanese armor and was primarily used for intimidation on the battlefield. The core of a Japanese army was Ashigaru who were not of the same caliber of samurai and were near afraid of a disciplined, deadly samurai warrior wearing the face of an Oni (demon). You will see towards the Meiji era some groups of samurai choosing to use less of their armor but the traditionalists definitely valued what fear did to an enemy.
Ceremonial and battlefield armor are quite different, I have read many sources that say they stopped wearing face masks because they needed to see and have peripheral vision. Combat got faster and weapons got lighter. They fought off horse back and with ranged weapons less in a more up in your face style. Try looking through little holes in a mask and see what you think. It would be like trying to see anything out of a halloween mask you wore when you were 5. After an hour or so all the little kids have the mask on top of their head too. If someone is taking a picture, boom, the mask is on.
My two cents:
Change the equation katana = bastard sword to katana = greatsword or falchion (I´d prefer falchion, the high crit fits the katana). Noone cares about shields if the defining weapon of the class is two handed. (I mean, samurais can´t cast so what do you use your other hand for? TWF? Even that profits from a shield. You can´t expect the character to be deliberately weaker than he could be.)
You guys seem to forget not everyone who uses this is gonna play a samurai. Leaving the shield in is fine as it hurts nothing, effects nothing and allows someone to build a heavy shield character that happens to use the samurai without being a "samurai"
+1
Then the name "samurai" is a little bit inappropriate. If not everyone who uses the samurai class is gonna play a samurai...it´s difficult to ignore historical roots of the word (even in a fantasy world)
The name is good since everyone can gain some little understatement of what the samurai class can do just from the name.
Historical roots, well, the common english word for a professional killer is "assassin" which originally was a term for a fanatical muslime commandolike fighter proficient with sword and bow who was fanatical enough to go on suicide missions and was given cannabis to dream about heaven. See how roots change? (I mean, the ethymology of assassin/hashashin is hashish which has nothing to do with the modern term)Other example, the rogue - archeologists are definetly no rogues, however the rogue class fits them best.
Classes are a base to work on. We cannot provide classes for every image or we will encouter the class explosion of 3.5 (which still didn´t satisfy every player) thus it´s best to make the existing classes most versatile - a class which can be used just for guys who resemble medieval japanese soldiers is not versatile. "True" Samurais are nice (in the right setting) but why stop here?
But, I think, one can't say the same thing for a loan word such as samurai, 'cause that name's notions are still too culturally and historically bound in its context.Actually, I guess, not small amount of people from the Japanese ancestory, would feel disdained if the term Samurai is used without some extent of respect to its heritage. In that sense, it's not like ninja, which has been told and fictionalized largely in mystical and fantasied contexts even in Japan.
How many strict conservative japanese traditionalists who aren´t able to just ignore something they don´t like play pathfinder? (or know about pathfinder)
I´ve seen many rpg books about magic rules that start with "oh and we don´t really believe in magic and are not sacrifizing virgins to the devil, this is a fictional books and we will certainly stay out of evolution vs creationism", screw political correctness(yeah, your posts wasn´t about that for the most part, don´t regard this post as an actual reply)
Maybe it's because golarion samurai use shields.
+1
One explanation I heard about how samurai not using shields (I think it was in some L5R material) was that those katana were too damn sharp to make shields viable. What good is a shield if your enemy just cuts it in two with his first strike (probably along with your arm)?
That´s lightsabers, not katanas. Hitting a sword with a katana means a great risk of the katana breaking. Katanas were damn sharp but don´t misinterprete that, choping of body parts is not how to use a katana (and L5R is probably not the best source since it´s based on pop culture)
As for the topic of why they didn´t use shields, shields are mostly for guys without armor (or partly armor like short chainmail), there were ironclad knights with shields but the common footknight will prefer a two handed sword.With the katana as the weapon of your enemy, you will be content with a light yoroi armor and no shield (if you fight enemies who have axes, halberds or other armor breaking weapons, this combination would proof fatal for you)
wakizashi was for seppku, apparently
That´s the tanto - or do you mean as the weapon the guy who chops your head of when your pain overwhelms you?
Samurais first swords were tachi, two handed. Then Uchigatana which came in two lengths (the first daisho) then katana and wakizashi.
Let´s stay simple, most people can´t see the difference between a tachi and a katana. Let´s act like if tachis would be katanas.
Heck I can't tell the difference either. Except history says Tachi was a two handed weapon.
Katana not so much, alot of the older paintings and pictures depicting the samurai using a sword two handed, were probably from (the art looks it) an earlier age and so was not likely the katana but a bigger weapon (the tachi) but for us to look at a picture, it just looks like the popular katana.
Heck most americans would know about katanas at all if it wasnt for highlander, TMNT and other pop culture media.
Katana not so much, alot of the older paintings and pictures depicting the samurai using a sword two handed, were probably from (the art looks it) an earlier age and so was not likely the katana but a bigger weapon (the tachi) but for us to look at a picture, it just looks like the popular katana.
Considering the Katana is designed to deliver powerful cuts using a torquing technique that requires both hands, it's safe to assume the weapon was normally wielded with two hands and OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE I DONE?
Considering the Katana is designed to deliver powerful cuts using a torquing technique that requires both hands, it's safe to assume the weapon was normally wielded with two hands and OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE I DONE?
Katana not so much, alot of the older paintings and pictures depicting the samurai using a sword two handed, were probably from (the art looks it) an earlier age and so was not likely the katana but a bigger weapon (the tachi) but for us to look at a picture, it just looks like the popular katana.
Really? there is no other way the katana can be used?
So maybe you should visit a kendo school or visit them at a demonstration and let them know every stroke they take one handed is wrong? I'm sure they would appreciate the pointers.