Is that Paizo keeps trying to keep it as an Alternate Class.
I know, it's like beating on a dead horse, but hear me out.
It's a Rogue Alternate Class. Which means it is a Rogue replacement. However, the problem with that is there is no way to make a proper Ninja without making it shine better than a Rogue. Because, let's face it folks, the Ninja is more than a Rogue. It's part Rogue and part Monk mostly. A skilled deceiver, infiltrator, spy, and assassin with supernatural powers.
So what you end up with is something that'll always be better than the Rogue. It's like a spellcasting Rogue without the spells. And a Monk with a firm role that the Rogue usually fills.
So, clearly, part of the solution is to keep it a base class separate from the Rogue. And give it FEW Rogue abilities. Most of its abilities should be supernatural only. If it wants the Rogue abilities (and Extraordinary ones, to not be caught unguarded in antimagic fields) it will simply have to multiclass as a Rogue.
Some folks suggest Ninja should be an Alternate Monk. But then you lack the Ninja/Monk multiclassing, which coincide as perfectly as Paladin/Fighter or Rogue/Fighter or even Druid/Ranger. But then again, maybe it is better off as an Alternate Monk instead.
My point is, being an Alternate Rogue class is what's causing the problems. Being an Alternate Class at all is the bigger problem, but if Paizo is sticking to their guns on this silly alternate class garbage, then my best suggestion is it should be an alternate Monk class.
So if its a rogue alternate and more powerful then the rogue its unacceptable but if it is a base class and stronger then the rogue it is A'Okay?
Why do people make this distinction? If it follows the rule of cool and doesn't unbalance the game it should be accepted.
Is that Paizo keeps trying to keep it as an Alternate Class.
I know, it's like beating on a dead horse, but hear me out.
It's a Rogue Alternate Class. Which means it is a Rogue replacement. However, the problem with that is there is no way to make a proper Ninja without making it shine better than a Rogue. Because, let's face it folks, the Ninja is more than a Rogue. It's part Rogue and part Monk mostly. A skilled deceiver, infiltrator, spy, and assassin with supernatural powers.
So what you end up with is something that'll always be better than the Rogue. It's like a spellcasting Rogue without the spells. And a Monk with a firm role that the Rogue usually fills.
So, clearly, part of the solution is to keep it a base class separate from the Rogue. And give it FEW Rogue abilities. Most of its abilities should be supernatural only. If it wants the Rogue abilities (and Extraordinary ones, to not be caught unguarded in antimagic fields) it will simply have to multiclass as a Rogue.
Some folks suggest Ninja should be an Alternate Monk. But then you lack the Ninja/Monk multiclassing, which coincide as perfectly as Paladin/Fighter or Rogue/Fighter or even Druid/Ranger. But then again, maybe it is better off as an Alternate Monk instead.
My point is, being an Alternate Rogue class is what's causing the problems. Being an Alternate Class at all is the bigger problem, but if Paizo is sticking to their guns on this silly alternate class garbage, then my best suggestion is it should be an alternate Monk class.
I'd rather the ninja be as faithfully designed as a Pathfinder class than restricted due to concerns about the rogue. Part of the reason I went to Pathfinder is because they seemed more interested in correctly designing an archetype rather than attempting to water everything down into a well-balanced, boring, watery soup of a game.
I want a ninja that plays like a ninja. Not a ninja designed around the idea it can't be better than a rogue. And this is coming from someone that DMs as well as plays.
Let me worry about challenging a ninja player as a DM and let me worry about conceiving of a concept that will fit my class choice. Designing a game to make sure min-maxers don't have an outright better class option is a poor way to go about game design.
What it comes down to is if someone comes up with a cool ninja concept, then play it. If someone is more rogue-like, then play it. Don't play the ninja because it is a better combat class.
As much as I complain about the rogue, the main reason no one plays one is that not many of my players want to play that type of concept. They prefer melee fighter types like barbarians, fighters, and monks. Monks get played a ton in my group even though they generally are inferior damage dealers. My players enjoy playing them, so they do.
Arcane casters get played a lot too. And aren't even always optimized. My players enjoy the archetype.
I want a ninja that is well-designed. For myself if they lowered some of the invisibility stuff or sneak attack damage and incorporated martial arts into the class, my players would be happier than if they kept the invisibility and high sneak attack damage.
My players want a ninja that feels like a ninja. That is their first concern. Combat power is secondary. So if Paizo lowers some of the combat power of the ninja, but makes up for it by adding in more combat versatility aka martial arts, I'll be happy with the ninja and it will get played in my groups.
No one will care less if it is better or worse than the rogue.
Paizo needs to stick with it's "faithful to the archetype" game design first and "balanced" second, or third even, behind "coolness of the archetype".
|
The problem is that there are very few differences between a rogue and a ninja. So if you design a ninja without worrying about whether or not it's overpowered compared to a rogue, then you end up with a character that not only is a better ninja than a rogue can be, but also manages to be a better rogue than a rogue can be.
The problem is that there are very few differences between a rogue and a ninja. So if you design a ninja without worrying about whether or not it's overpowered compared to a rogue, then you end up with a character that not only is a better ninja than a rogue can be, but also manages to be a better rogue than a rogue can be.
This is only true if, like Paizo has, you base Ninja off the Rogue, as the OP states, why not base the Ninja off the Monk, then he can be as well as designed as you need and not compete with the rogue at all. Make a Ninja to a Monk, as Anti-paladin is to Paladin - kind of the opposite class in theme within the same structure.
By basing Ninja off a monk, you have Climb, Escape Artist, Perception, Sense Motive, Stealth - which are all skills that emulate the sneaky ninja fairly well, and not even based on the rogue.
The APG feats: Spider Walk and Cloud Walk feel very Ninja, yet are based on a Monk's Slow Fall class feature, which makes Ninja is a Monk archetype much more sensible.
The Monk's Ki powers fit with the supernatural qualities many want in their ninja build.
Besides I thought it was unfair to give Paizo's Ninja Ki powers at 2nd level, while the Monk has to wait until 4th level - that seems unbalanced to me.
And as I mentioned on another thread, Sneak Attack doesn't feel like Ninja at all. Ninja should avoid combat if they can, Assassinate would be the only appropriate current Ninja ability that agrees with my sensibilities on what a Ninja should do in combat. Sneak attack, not so much.
Not to worry, my ninja will be Shinobi archetype for several classes including monk and rogue, and will be nothing like this ninja design.
GP
Is that Paizo keeps trying to keep it as an Alternate Class.
I know, it's like beating on a dead horse, but hear me out.
It's a Rogue Alternate Class. Which means it is a Rogue replacement. However, the problem with that is there is no way to make a proper Ninja without making it shine better than a Rogue. Because, let's face it folks, the Ninja is more than a Rogue. It's part Rogue and part Monk mostly. A skilled deceiver, infiltrator, spy, and assassin with supernatural powers.
I agree completely. In fact, there are so many Ninja legends that trying to fit them all into one class is a exercise in futility. There are too many ways to color a ninja to, frankly, WASTE on one class.
In my own campaign, I throw in a Ninja Clan (which I creatively call, the NINJA) composed entirely of dispossessed Half-Elves. They are contemptuous of all races except themselves, and as such make excellent assassins. Every member of the clan has levels in Rogue, but they also have levels in other classes based on their level of expertise.
The rank and file Ninja have levels in Fighter -- wield weapons but can whoop ass unarmed as well. The sneaky-sneaky Ninja are either full on Rogue or Rogue-Assassins (I never use assassins against players, but I love to threaten them with them). And of course, there is always a small handful of Rogue-Sorcerers with their crazy Ninja Magic. I haven't built a Rogue-Monk into the mix, but only because the other Ninja are more than enough to do the job.
The point is, Ninja are more like a society than a class to me. Turning it into a strict class kind of pigeon-holes them, and further-more screws with the balance of the game, since what you want to make is a rogue-fighter-sorcerer-monk that is good at all of these things.
Let me worry about challenging a ninja player as a DM and let me worry about conceiving of a concept that will fit my class choice. Designing a game to make sure min-maxers don't have an outright better class option is a poor way to go about game design.
You realize of course that Paizo is a company whose bread and butter has been making campaigns to play and (this is something Paizo themselves often seems to forget) a living society exists? Sure, you might be able to modify the campaigns to challenge the ninja, but that's not the point. Moreover, what about PFS?
Imbalanced classes lead to a bad game where players actually trying to be effectively all play the same more powerful classes over their less powerful counterparts.
The point is, Ninja are more like a society than a class to me. Turning it into a strict class kind of pigeon-holes them, and further-more screws with the balance of the game, since what you want to make is a rogue-fighter-sorcerer-monk that is good at all of these things.
Oh, I completely agree with this. For Kaidan, Shinobi is an archetype for Bard, Monk, Ranger, Rogue and Sorcerer, with a possible Ninja PrC. So there is no single flavor of Ninja for my setting. The rogue archetype will undoubtably be somewhat similar to this build for a Ninja, sans Sneak Attack.
In fact as with Shinobi, Yakuza and Samurai both fall into castes (societies) not individual classes. Each consist of at least 3 or more classes - at least that's how it will be done in Kaidan.
|
If you're going to have a ninja class, it should be different enough from Rogue to keep it from stepping on it's toes(much like Time Thief did, though that one could use a bit of a power boost).
Ninja brings a lot of new stuff to the table, but is basically, a class variant that's makes the class stronger, rather than adjust its ability sets while keeping it just as strong.
The class either needs to be dropped or modified more to where it's it's own entity. That's a problem I've had with all 3 of these Ultimate Combat classes. They're unimpressive tweaks on existing classes that pose as being an actual class. Ninja, Samurai, & Gunslinger all should be something you can do with existing classes via new feats and/or variants.
Please ready Ultimate combat play test..... they are NOT trying to pose as ACTUAL CLASSES.
If you're going to have a ninja class, it should be different enough from Rogue to keep it from stepping on it's toes(much like Time Thief did, though that one could use a bit of a power boost).
Ninja brings a lot of new stuff to the table, but is basically, a class variant that's makes the class stronger, rather than adjust its ability sets while keeping it just as strong.
The class either needs to be dropped or modified more to where it's it's own entity. That's a problem I've had with all 3 of these Ultimate Combat classes. They're unimpressive tweaks on existing classes that pose as being an actual class. Ninja, Samurai, & Gunslinger all should be something you can do with existing classes via new feats and/or variants.
All I got from this post is "Down with rangers!!!" common guys bards and rangers have been stepping on the rogues toes from day one, but no one complains about them.
Stop looking at it as an archtype, it is a alternate class, which essentially means it is a new class, but isn't called one because it steals abilities from an existing class.
From what I've seen, some players really just want a weak useless ninja so they can tell the fanboys to shut up, but don't want any of their players to have any incentive to play one. edit: this part is not directed at you infernos
Ninjas need a very unique ability that make them different from the Rogue.
"Oh.. Ranger!" "I can make one combining Druid/Fighter!"
"Oh... Paladin!" "I can make one combining Fighter/Cleric!"
You get the idea.
Agreed.
I think the problem stems mainly from the Rogue class. It needs to have more things to separate itself from the Ninja. Rogues are more than just Ninja. Ninja focus on specializing in a few fields only. Rogues are much more diverse. If they gave the Rogue more talents dedicated to adventuring, exploring, socializing, gambling, criminal activities, daredevil, thuggery, etc. then it would be much more interesting and diverse class to play.
Instead, the Rogue is the one that has a lot of stuff the Ninja is best at. Which isn't what a Rogue is at all. That's just one area of expertise a Rogue can choose to do, it shouldn't be it's sole focus.
I mean come on alternate classes ALREADY??? god.. 3.5 didn't touch that until it play tested "4th ed" with that weird sword book.. what was it called??? where barbarians cast magic....oh yea.. used that as a table evener outer..
Hahaha, seriously? You're seriously saying that Pathfinder is making more alternate classes than 3.5e did? I'm sorry, but you must have played some alternate universe's 3.5e or something, 3e and 3.5e supplements were filled with classes, class variants, and PrCs long before the "weird sword book"(I'm guessing you mean Tome of Battle, but the context of barbarians casting magic makes it hard to know for sure).
Also, why in the world do you think that you need to throw out the core book already? Pathfinder has mostly avoided power creep so far, though of course they can't be perfect and some classes got slight power boosts in the APG. Still, none of the classes in the APG have suddenly made any of the core classes obsolete, most of the archetypes seem balanced, and of the two playtests we have going only the ninja seems somewhat more powerful than it's base class, the rogue, which many people feel is underpowered.
point being.. ninja ok.. cross between monk and rogue?? ok.. sounds prestige class to me... NOT "alternate class"
just like Fighter/Druid can prestige to ranger and Fighter/Cleric can prestige into pally! Wait... no those classes are pretty much mixtures but they got there own base class anyway....
The only reason those guys get a free ride is because they have become dnd staples. If were going to let some mixtures in there is no reason not to let others (especially if mixing them together makes a class a specific as Ninja)
And for the love of god, The ONLY reason it is an alternate is because they wanted to give it sneak attack THAT IS ALL. Its stupid to make a base class that borrows the exact same powers as another. slight alteration? sure, completely stolen = alternate class
|
|
to Dragonslie:
I still disagree with you about the power level. The rogue isn't as powerful in combat but is infinitely more useful out of combat.
Traps on their own have been a joke in 3.5 and pathfinder TBH(need to combine them with other elements increasing CR etc etc ) - ninjas are a CHR based class for talking to people.
oh and in pathfinder... skills are much more easily obtained.
Obviously this is going no where I yield to you you can keep your opinion and i'll keep mine.
Rite Publishing will be working on a Yakuza book for Kaidan and we're including Yakuza talents which include 'Reading Tells', 'Reading Signals' both used in gambling and cheating at gambling. Each Yakuza gang will have it's own gang language - a limited slang for criminal activity commmunication. It would be appropriate to allow yakuza talents to be optionally available to rogue, as rogues comprise a large segment of the yakuza.
In Kaidan, Yakuza is an organization structured around the 'foster father/foster son' relationship. It includes a Machi-Yakko gang boss (working on an alternate class), kyodai (rogue), Bushi (fighter), Bakushi (bard) and Horimyo (tattoo sorcerer). So the book will contain multiple archetypes, new feats, new spells, a detail on the organization, history and culture of this subculture. In Kaidan only the Hinin (tainted) caste allow the wearing of arcane tattoos. Monks of the Heimin (commoner) caste do not wear them as they are considered taboo and the mark of a criminal. Rogues may wear up to 2 arcane tattoos. The Machi-Yakko will gain 5, as well as the Horimyo.
I also have Ki Potential Trait, which may be taken by any non-Ki class (monk and some shinobi archetypes), as well as the Activate Ki feat which grants that character a ki pool of 2 points only, this does not progress with levels, though Extra Ki feat grants 1 more point. A Yakuza rogue may take up to 3 Ki powers from the General Ki Powers List (ki powers lists will be in the Shinobi book)
So I intend to expand the possibilities of rogue, at least as it applies to my Japan-inspired Asian horror setting, Kaidan.
Not to mention, we've got Shinobi (ninja archetypes) for Bard, Monk, Ranger, Rogue and Sorceror. In Kaidan, Shinobi are of the Commoner caste thus cannot wear tattoos.
do i... do I flag it? Ima.... Im gonna go ahead and flag it... really odd spam post if thats what it is though....
Edit: Although re-reading it I don't even know... might be real, I dont know anymore.
Edit2: So yeah I should probably apologize in case that post was meant to be relevant
do i... do I flag it? Ima.... Im gonna go ahead and flag it... really odd spam post if thats what it is though....
Edit: Although re-reading it I don't even know... might be real, I dont know anymore.
Edit2: So yeah I should probably apologize in case that post was meant to be relevant
Sorry, not meant to be SPAM. There is a complaint that the rogue is diminished by the ninja. I am only saying by expanding the talents of a rogue, or giving it added class features, diminishing the rogue doesn't have to be the case.
I'm comfortable with Paizo's Ninja build. I know they will tweak it based on these threads to something I can use, or can be used in my setting. We'll be selling all our products from the Paizo Store... so SPAM for Paizo?
Creating new Rogue Talents isn't power creep any more than the new talents offered by the APG, it maintains an existing power just adds to it.
Somebody upthread mentioned and I agree that rogues should be skilled gamblers, or have more charisma based skills like conning people out of their money or to make their targets vulnerable to exploitation, or skills like misdirection - expanding on rogue as meaning more than just sneaking and disarming traps would give rogues more versatility and still remain essentially rogue.
And I'm only concerned with the overly weak classes like rogue and monk not the Superman classes like wizard, sorcerer, summoner - those classes don't need extras, as they alone are almost too much.
Besides I'm a 3pp, I'm supposed to create power creep - just doing it right and appropriately - my suggestions won't necessarily fall into a Paizo change in class abilities, so unless you buy my products you won't get any such power creep.
Your point is in wearing the "power creep" blinders and not looking what the actual addition does, it only expands the list of existing rogue talents, its not creating an entirely new class feature. So in reality its not power creep at all.
GP
The problem is that there are very few differences between a rogue and a ninja. So if you design a ninja without worrying about whether or not it's overpowered compared to a rogue, then you end up with a character that not only is a better ninja than a rogue can be, but also manages to be a better rogue than a rogue can be.This is only true if, like Paizo has, you base Ninja off the Rogue, as the OP states, why not base the Ninja off the Monk, then he can be as well as designed as you need and not compete with the rogue at all. Make a Ninja to a Monk, as Anti-paladin is to Paladin - kind of the opposite class in theme within the same structure.
By basing Ninja off a monk, you have Climb, Escape Artist, Perception, Sense Motive, Stealth - which are all skills that emulate the sneaky ninja fairly well, and not even based on the rogue.
The APG feats: Spider Walk and Cloud Walk feel very Ninja, yet are based on a Monk's Slow Fall class feature, which makes Ninja is a Monk archetype much more sensible.
The Monk's Ki powers fit with the supernatural qualities many want in their ninja build.
Besides I thought it was unfair to give Paizo's Ninja Ki powers at 2nd level, while the Monk has to wait until 4th level - that seems unbalanced to me.
And as I mentioned on another thread, Sneak Attack doesn't feel like Ninja at all. Ninja should avoid combat if they can, Assassinate would be the only appropriate current Ninja ability that agrees with my sensibilities on what a Ninja should do in combat. Sneak attack, not so much.
Not to worry, my ninja will be Shinobi archetype for several classes including monk and rogue, and will be nothing like this ninja design.
GP
+1. Agree on all counts.
If you base the ninja off the monk don't you think the same inherent problems would occur between monk and ninja as rogue and ninja??????? a duh....
Not at all. I said to base Ninja off Monk, as Anti-Paladin is to Paladin. Do not give extra class features that the base class doesn't have, just give different abilities balanced for the same level. Such as for Paladin, you have Mercies, wheres for Anti-Paladin, you have cruelties, they are essentially the same power, just one removes the condition, and the other puts it on. Do the same between Monk abilities and Ninja abilities. Replace Diamond Mind with Obsidian Mind that offers a different or opposite ability as to Diamond Mind.
The UC Ninja build gives a Ki pool to the ninja, even though it is based on the Rogue, however the Rogue never gets a ki pool, so this alternate class grants a profound ability that the base does not have. This is not the same thing as switching the same abilities as Anti-Paladin is to Paladin. As an alterate rogue, as it stands, its over-powerful - not balanced at all.
Since the Ninja still ought to get assassinate, I would replace one or some of its "Diamond Abilities with Assassinate", but that would be one of its higher abilities if not the capstone power.
It wouldn't compete with the Monk mechanically, it would essentially be identical, only different thematically, which makes for a balanced and interesting alternate class.
So it would not have the problem this ninja build has over the rogue.
GP
yea ADD to a balanced CORE class... because thats the anwser......lets power creep the wizard next...
I'm sorry but this sentence does not make sense.
game-printer: IMHO they got it right. The ninja as a rogue with some of the monk is the right way to go. Myself, I would not play a ninja without Sneak Attack.
So you want ninja to be an APG monk.....
A different specific Monk archetype, yes, though it's equivalent currently doesn't exist in the APG, just the concept on making one.
However, as stated, I am building Shinobi archetypes for Bard, Monk, Ranger, Rogue and Sorcerer, as Shinobi in my setting comprise a family community hidden away from the empire - one of five such Ninja houses that operate for a specific set of clients.
The monk archetype would be a major member of such a clan.
But you're basically correct, I prefer a monk based ninja.
GP
yea ADD to a balanced CORE class... because thats the anwser......lets power creep the wizard next...I'm sorry but this sentence does not makes sense.
game-printer: IMHO they got it right. The ninja as a rogue with some of the monk is the right way to go. Myself, I would not play a ninja without Sneak Attack.
The shinobi archetype for rogue in my setting would definitely get Sneak Attack, but would never have a ki pool of more than 3 points, however I would still allow access to the various ki powers offered by the UC Ninja, just not a lot of points to use them with.
Another member of the ninja clan, the shinobi monk archetype or the shinobi ranger archetype gets a full ki pool (ki pool replaces divine casting for ranger). However all shinobi archetypes would otherwise be required to take Ki Potential Trait and Activate Ki feat as prerequisites so they would have a small ki pool.
So I'm in agreement with you that a rogue based shinobi (ninja) should have Sneak Attack in addition to other ninja like abilities. Just not the same as the UC Ninja, at least not the Beta version.
GP
Monk or bard, please. Rogue should be used for a less magical ninja.
Exactly.
GP
Monk or bard, please. Rogue should be used for a less magical ninja.
Bard? O.o how is bard ninja like at all?? And monk would have the same problem as rogue, it will either stronger then the monk or way too weak, those are the only options.
Why over or under powered only? It should be exactly the same.
Give both the Ninja and Monk the same ki pool at the same level. Allow both their fast movement and slow fall abilities, identically. Allow both to have improved unarmed strike, evasion, flurry of blows, stunning fist.
Replace all the Diamond abiilties with alternates that provide differing powers at equal level, DC checks are the same, bonuses/penalties the same.
Replace Quivering Palm with Assassinate, at the same Fort DC check - I do prefer the Assassin PrC, rather than Ninja, requiring 3 rounds of observation before a successful strike. Leave out all the resurrection resistance assassinate powers of the Assassin.
Offering a differing set, plus a wider selection of Ki powers available to both the Ninja and the Monk.
Switch to an alternate capstone and you have a ninja, and for mechanical purposes, its identical to monk, not more or less powered.
How is that hard or broken?
GP
Why over or under powered only? It should be exactly the same.
Give both the Ninja and Monk the same ki pool at the same level. Allow both their fast movement and slow fall abilities, identically. Allow both to have improved unarmed strike, evasion, flurry of blows, stunning fist.
Had me up to the flurry of blows, and stunning fist. Don't see that fitting things too well. Instead I would replace these, and possibley the unarmed strike progression for sneak attack bonus, and possibly some ability granting a higher to-hit bonus for performing such sneak attacks.