or a Bow, a Longspear, a Halberd - in that order.
Anyways, Samurai + Katana has a point because the Daisho was a badge of honor for a Samurai and a Longsword wasn't for medieval knights.
While Samurai almost always would wear their Daisho and would always use these in duels, most european knights didn't care a lot for swords, perferring maces, morning stars and whatnot.
But imho the Pathfinder Samurai should NOT start with a free Katana as there are all sorts of reasons why a Pthfinder Samurai would use another weapon and not even own a Katana.
Finally, as an experienced european medieval longsword (bastardsword) fencer and with quite some experience in fighting with katanas, i must say neither weapon is clearly superior. The Katana has the stronger cut and (being a knife rather than a sword) is more durable. The Longsword is more versatile and has the stronger thrust.
I would prefer a Longsword every time.
Probably the wrong thread, but...
To settle a rather -acrimonious- debate at my house, does the listing of katana as a weapon for both samurai and ninja mean the exotic wp or just allowing it's use as martial?
Probably the wrong thread, but...
To settle a rather -acrimonious- debate at my house, does the listing of katana as a weapon for both samurai and ninja mean the exotic wp or just allowing it's use as martial?
Unless noted otherwise, I'd assume it's martial proficiency - like how a fighter can use a Bastard Sword with two hands as a martial proficiency without spending a feat, but must spend an exotic weapon feat to use it one-handed. I'd say that with the katana listed as a weapon for both means that they can use it two-handed, and would have to spent an exotic weapon feat for one-handed use.
Unless noted otherwise, I'd assume it's martial proficiency - like how a fighter can use a Bastard Sword with two hands as a martial proficiency without spending a feat, but must spend an exotic weapon feat to use it one-handed. I'd say that with the katana listed as a weapon for both means that they can use it two-handed, and would have to spent an exotic weapon feat for one-handed use.That is just silly. Proficiency with a stated weapon means full proficiency. Rogues don't need to wield a rapier in two hands to use it proficiently (and yes I'm aware of how inanely comical that would look, and how awkward that would be to actually do), I see no reason why it should be different in this case.
Well, rapiers are one-handed weapons, and katanas, like bastard swords, are two-handed weapons, for one thing. With extra training, you can use it one-handed effectively, but by and large, the weapon is designed for two-handed use. That's not an issue of "full proficiency", it's an issue of using a weapon in a manner it is not fully designed for.
No, they are not. They are one-handed weapons that can be used two-handed with a generic weapon proficiency. Giving full proficiency to a class that is stated to have proficiency with a weapon is just common sense.
Let's see... the grip is long enough for two hands, the balance is made for two hands, and most schools that teach it's use teach two hands... yup, sounds like a one-hander to me.
Being able to use a katana one-handed is the rare exception, not the standard practice.
|
No, they are not. They are one-handed weapons that can be used two-handed with a generic weapon proficiency. Giving full proficiency to a class that is stated to have proficiency with a weapon is just common sense.Let's see... the grip is long enough for two hands, the balance is made for two hands, and most schools that teach it's use teach two hands... yup, sounds like a one-hander to me.
Being able to use a katana one-handed is the rare exception, not the standard practice.
He is talking about how bastard swords game mechanics works...not the design aspect of how a real katana was used. Bastard sword in game are a one handed exotic weapon that just has a special clause that you can use it two handed with no penalty if you have martial weapons. Hence why it is listed as a one handed exotic weapon and not a two handed martial weapon...even if realistically, it should be a two handed martial weapon that can be used one handed if you took an exotic weapons feat.
He is talking about how bastard swords game mechanics works...not the design aspect of how a real katana was used. Bastard sword in game are a one handed exotic weapon that just has a special clause that you can use it two handed with no penalty if you have martial weapons. Hence why it is listed as a one handed exotic weapon and not a two handed martial weapon...even if realistically, it should be a two handed martial weapon that can be used one handed if you took an exotic weapons feat.
That's how I always interpreted it - that's it's a two-handed martial weapon, that you can use with one hand with an exotic weapon proficiency. I suppose it could be written clearer, but that seems to be how it makes sense. So if you don't have proficiency in martial weapons, you'd have to take martial weapon proficiency: bastard sword, and then exotic weapon proficiency: bastard sword to use it one-handed.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
That's how I always interpreted it - that's it's a two-handed martial weapon, that you can use with one hand with an exotic weapon proficiency. I suppose it could be written clearer, but that seems to be how it makes sense. So if you don't have proficiency in martial weapons, you'd have to take martial weapon proficiency: bastard sword, and then exotic weapon proficiency: bastard sword to use it one-handed.
The thing is, "Sword, bastard" is listed on the weapons chart as a One-handed Exotic Melee weapon, not as a Two-handed Martial Melee weapon.
As written, that makes it an exotic weapon. All you need to use it, one or two handed, is Exotic Weapon Proficiency (which does not require Martial Weapon Proficiency).
If the samurai wants to have a heirloom weapon, he should invest in the trait to have one.
But indeed, samurais came with a vast arsenal which I think should be left to the player's discretion instead of being incorporated as a restrictive class bonus.
Everyone does realize that the weapon names are just a catch-all term for a weapon that is similar to other weapons.
Example:
Greatsword- This immense two-handed sword is about 5 feet in length.
This would cover any blade you can think of no matter what the culture calls it.
Longsword- This sword is about 3-1/2 feet in length.
Again this would cover weapons of any culture that fits in that area.
Bastard Sword- A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training.
See they are just generalized weapon categories.
Scimitar- A scimitar is a sword with a curved blade.
Elven Curved Blade- Essentially a longer version of a scimitar, but with a thinner blade, the elven curve blade is exceptionally rare.
So if you want a weapon that is named in that list you look at the size or how its shaped and then use a similar category. It not hard the game doesn't need hundreds of different stats when there are broad categories.
Using this method if you want a Katana(Two-Handed Weapon that could be used in one hand that has a curved blade) use a Elven Curved Blade or Bastard Sword. Done. Simple.
A lot of this comes down to, whether you want a carfully researched historically realistic samurai... who has to fight next to Konan the raging barbarian and Eragorn the dual wielding ranger, or if you want the katana wielding action hero that we see in movies. I think the superficial movie samurai is probably what's called for in a game where most the character's are based off of one movie stereotype or another.
As it is, the weapon system is already made up of a lot of abstractions. In real world weaponry definite weapon categories are rare, as the state of weaponry was always changing, and foreign influence was frequently shifting. What one person called a scimitar, another might call a falchion, someone else might call it a saber, and someone from the far east might just call a broad sword. But who want's that much accuracy and granularity in a fantasy role playing game, especially D&D. The worst thing a samurai ever had to face was a bunch of other samurai. The worst thing your samurai has to face probably has a lot of heads, tentacles, and spell like abilities. If you don't want to hack it a part with a katana, just play a fighter with an Asian accent.
|
|
Or you could just take Exotic Weapon Proficiency and use it whichever way you prefer. This method has the advantage of being less feat intensive and accomplishing the same goal.
The problem with your argument is that wielding the bastard sword/katana/what-have-you two-handed doesn't mean that a character is proficient, they just aren't penalized for being non-proficient. I admit it might be a weird way of interpreting the rule, but that is the reasoning that makes the most sense to me. Which brings me back to my original point, which is that proficient means proficient. Not some strange pseudo-proficiency. If a character is proficient with a weapon, it means they can use it any which way that the rules allow.
Course then you have the balance issue that you seem to want to ignore. If the exotic weapon bastard sword is a balanced feat, then the samurai has a power creep by having a more powerful weapons list then the cavalier with nothing that to detract for that. If by chance the addition of the exotic weapon isn't any better(i mean zip zilch nada)...then there is a SEVERE problem with the feat.
That's how I always interpreted it - that's it's a two-handed martial weapon, that you can use with one hand with an exotic weapon proficiency. I suppose it could be written clearer, but that seems to be how it makes sense. So if you don't have proficiency in martial weapons, you'd have to take martial weapon proficiency: bastard sword, and then exotic weapon proficiency: bastard sword to use it one-handed.The thing is, "Sword, bastard" is listed on the weapons chart as a One-handed Exotic Melee weapon, not as a Two-handed Martial Melee weapon.
As written, that makes it an exotic weapon. All you need to use it, one or two handed, is Exotic Weapon Proficiency (which does not require Martial Weapon Proficiency).
From the description of the bastard sword, p. 149 of the PFRPG Core Rulebook: A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
To use a martial weapon, you need a martial weapon proficiency in it.
Nowhere does it say that you can use it two-handed without penalty; if you're not proficient in martial weapons, you still take the -4.
|
Nowhere does it say that you can use it two-handed without penalty; if you're not proficient in martial weapons, you still take the -4.
I think you're being too literal.
The designers phrased that to be as:If you use the weapon in one hand with no proficiency then you would suffer the -4, but if used 2 handed it would be no penalties. Since the damage it does would equal some 2-handed weapons that already exist without exotic proficiencies.
Nowhere does it say that you can use it two-handed without penalty; if you're not proficient in martial weapons, you still take the -4.I think you're being too literal.
The designers phrased that to be as:
If you use the weapon in one hand with no proficiency then you would suffer the -4, but if used 2 handed it would be no penalties. Since the damage it does would equal some 2-handed weapons that already exist without exotic proficiencies.
2-handed, by someone who is already proficient in martial weapons, without penalty. I think that's an important distinction. They don't say "used two handed as a simple weapon" or "used two-handed without penalty". It's specified that it's a martial weapon, which requires training.
I might just be adding fuel to the flame, but I think that swords were pretty much "broadswords" (slashing only)until better steel and forging abilities allowed for a smaller thrusting tipped "longsword" (slashing and thrusting) in later years. In my game I allow longswords to pierce with full effect if technology is advanced enough to have half-plate armor.
As for using katanas to pierce or a shortsword to slash, which IMHO think they can do less efficiently. I use a die step of damage less. (ie. 1d4 damage for slashing with a shortsword or full 1d6 with pierce.) In combat I don't worry about whether someone hacks or stabs unless the opponent has damage reduction. I prefer not to slow down the story with too much realism. Also, I think that Hand and a half weapons should be just a martial proficiency for one or two handed. I only let a character use it one handed with full effect if they have a 14+ Strength; a die step damage less if <14 Str. And yes, if an average person tries to stab one handed with a bastard sword they do a d6 in my game.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
From the description of the bastard sword, p. 149 of the PFRPG Core Rulebook: A character use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
To use a martial weapon, you need a martial weapon proficiency in it.
Nowhere does it say that you can use it two-handed without penalty; if you're not proficient in martial weapons, you still take the -4.
I've modified your emphasis to point out the important word: Can. Not Must. Treating is as a martial weapon is an option, not a requirement.
If you've got EWP: Bastard Sword, then you're proficient with the bastard sword. You can use it one-handed, following all the normal rules for one-handed weapons, including the rule that says you can two-hand it for extra damage.
I might just be adding fuel to the flame, but I think that swords were pretty much "broadswords" (slashing only)until better steel and forging abilities allowed for a smaller thrusting tipped "longsword" (slashing and thrusting) in later years. In my game I allow longswords to pierce with full effect if technology is advanced enough to have half-plate armor.
As for using katanas to pierce or a shortsword to slash, which IMHO think they can do less efficiently. I use a die step of damage less. (ie. 1d4 damage for slashing with a shortsword or full 1d6 with pierce.) In combat I don't worry about whether someone hacks or stabs unless the opponent has damage reduction. I prefer not to slow down the story with too much realism. Also, I think that Hand and a half weapons should be just a martial proficiency for one or two handed. I only let a character use it one handed with full effect if they have a 14+ Strength; a die step damage less if <14 Str. And yes, if an average person tries to stab one handed with a bastard sword they do a d6 in my game.
The hideously massive scar on my right thumb cares to differ with your contention that short swords slash ineffectively.
Arguments like these are, imho, the perfect example of way katana do not need special rules. Even if they had special rules for it, there's be just as many threads saying "rofl they're wrong, here's what it should be."
Functions as bastard sword. This has served us for years, and I see no reason why it should change. I think if people had it the way they wanted it, every samurai would start with a +5 vorpal katana of instant monster destruction because everyone knows katana were the best swords ever made and they can do anything!
Course then you have the balance issue that you seem to want to ignore. If the exotic weapon bastard sword is a balanced feat, then the samurai has a power creep by having a more powerful weapons list then the cavalier with nothing that to detract for that. If by chance the addition of the exotic weapon isn't any better(i mean zip zilch nada)...then there is a SEVERE problem with the feat.You, sir, are make a mountain out of an ant-hill. A cavalier can use any of the weapons on the Samurai list. The only exotic weapon on that list is the katana (bastard sword) and the cavalier can use that in a two-handed grip as well, all of the others have martial weapon equivalents (Naginata=Glaive, Wakizashi=Short Sword), so a cavalier could also use those. None of these are auto-masterwork, so that is another point against your "power creep" theory.
In short, I see nothing in your post but buzzwords written in the hopes that they will inflame passions without anyone actually analyzing the content of the post itself.
Just because you disagree with cold napalm as I do, doesn't mean he's trolling. He's combining his "buzz words" in a way that makes a salient point, so by all means attack his point but don't attack is right to make the point.
To your point regarding the Glaive and the Short sword, all weapons are not created equal. The most base weapon damage a warrior type can hope to do with one hand is 1d10 via katanna, bastard sword, or dwarven war axe, all of them requiring a feat. At low levels, giving this feature for free isn't negligible. However I agree that it isn't game changing, or even unbalancing. Dwarves get the same thing for free, and fighters can easily spend their level 1 bonus feat on accomplishing the same. These capabilities are built into the class/race and were considered as the class was balanced. There's no reason a level 1 samurai shouldn't get this feat-worthy ability, but it should be a major part of his first level goodies, or otherwise he can outfight the fighter.
|
|
You're right, edross. I'm going to take that last sentence out, it was written when I was in an irritated mood. But my point wasn't that all these weapons are created equally, it was that there isn't a weapon type that the Samurai can use that the Cavalier cannot, so there was no real power creep besides what he subjectively perceived.
Edit: Okay, I can't edit that part out. Blasted time limits on edits...
Samurai can use the bastard sword one handed...so he can use two of them...or basically anything not THF. Yeah yeah +1 extra average damage is pretty piddly,.but it's a FREE +1 extra damage over the cav. I never said it was a BIG power creep...but +1 extra damage unless your doing THF is STILL a power creep. Is it game shatter? No,but then again I never said that...but to say a +1 free damage isn't a power creep is disingenuous. So unless the cavs get errated to gain bastard sword for free as well...the samurai have a free one up on their western counterparts. This small bump maybe acceptable to you (and honestly I don't really care either)...but to say that EVERYONE has to be okay with this because it's a none issue for you is kinda extreme don't you think
Samurai can use the bastard sword one handed...so he can use two of them...or basically anything not THF. Yeah yeah +1 extra average damage is pretty piddly,.but it's a FREE +1 extra damage over the cav. I never said it was a BIG power creep...but +1 extra damage unless your doing THF is STILL a power creep. Is it game shatter? No,but then again I never said that...but to say a +1 free damage isn't a power creep is disingenuous. So unless the cavs get errated to gain bastard sword for free as well...the samurai have a free one up on their western counterparts. This small bump maybe acceptable to you (and honestly I don't really care either)...but to say that EVERYONE has to be okay with this because it's a none issue for you is kinda extreme don't you thinkYou're right, edross. I'm going to take that last sentence out, it was written when I was in an irritated mood. But my point wasn't that all these weapons are created equally, it was that there isn't a weapon type that the Samurai can use that the Cavalier cannot, so there was no real power creep besides what he subjectively perceived.
Edit: Okay, I can't edit that part out. Blasted time limits on edits...
Using two bastard swords actually sounds like a punishment when you combine the general gimpedness of two weapon fighting with the extra to hit penalty of not wielding at least one light weapon, but I guess your point was more general about the benefits of a high damage one handed weapon.
Personally, power creep doesn't bother me too much as long as it isn't something splat creeping over something core. As a GM, I have enough to do without learning the ins and outs of every splat-class my players talk me into letting them play, but I know the core classes more or less inside out, broken as some of them maybe. I can plan accordingly. Fortunately, so far Paizo seems pretty trust worthy, so I'm able to just scan over a new splat class and allow it. But the first time I see a splat class out performing its core class equivalent, I'll know we've reached the point we did with 3.5 where I need to outlaw any splat book I haven't personally spent two weeks evaluating.
Well power creep is call creep for a reason. +1 damage becomes +2. Then +2 becomes +4. +4 then becomes +10. Remember that the early 3.x splat didn't cause much issues either.
Good point.
Probably the wrong thread, but...
To settle a rather -acrimonious- debate at my house, does the listing of katana as a weapon for both samurai and ninja mean the exotic wp or just allowing it's use as martial?
Proficient means proficient in my book. End of discussion.
If you've got EWP: Bastard Sword, then you're proficient with the bastard sword. You can use it one-handed, following all the normal rules for one-handed weapons, including the rule that says you can two-hand it for extra damage.
You can use any one-handed weapon by RAW two-handed, gaining all the benefits thereof.
Using this method if you want a Katana(Two-Handed Weapon that could be used in one hand that has a curved blade) use a Elven Curved Blade or Bastard Sword. Done. Simple.
Pretty much. The only question is, is it balanced to give the samurai the proficiency?
Comparing the elven curve-blade with the greatsword, they are actually quite balanced: The greatsword does more base damage, the ECB has a higher threat range and is finesse-able. The ECB is better than a two-handed bastard sword, but then it costs more. If you could use the ECB one-handed it would again be a better weapon than the bastard sword, but still costs more.
Myself, I'd use the ECB stats for a katana, and require an additional EWP feat to use it one-handed. Hence your samurai could have katana proficiency at level 1 for free - same as an elf, it does not really confer any big advantage, and it costs half his starting wealth to boot. If he wants to use it one handed it costs him a feat, same as everyone else, and he can pay the price and reap the benefit.
The hideously massive scar on my right thumb cares to differ with your contention that short swords slash ineffectively.
LESS efficiently is the key word. I have a scar from s spear slash. Not a spear stab, mind you. And I have a few scars from the various (1d4) knives in my life. My point is that it is better for stabbing.(pun intended) This is not a black or white "short swords can't cut" statement, but a lovely shade of gray statement that says "they can cut, but are even better for stabbing". By the rules, as stated, a short sword does Piercing damage and by that rule it can't cut a rope. I am presenting a rule option that says that it CAN cut a rope as good as any knife or dagger. BTW my more impressive scars are from much less impressive sources. A 5pt scar is just as impressive looking whether it came from a 1d3+2 or a 1d6, at least until you tell the story;)
I'd like to throw in here that there is another thread going on about the katana, that is generating some good ideas. The best one I've seen, would seem to apply rather well to this discussion:
Katana is finessable, does 1d8, has crit range of 18-20, and can be used two handed as a martial weapon or 1 handed as an exotic weapon.
Assuming that the ninja/samurai proficiency is free exotic katana (and not martial), then this would give them something cool and useful, but would not result in a samurai dealing better 1 hand damage than the Cav.
Also it makes the Katana it's own unique weapon, filling in a spot that no other weapon does.
EDIT: Come to think of it though, it would probably be better to just make it an exotic 1 handed weapon- then if someone really wanted to two hand it, they could for the extra str damage.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
If you've got EWP: Bastard Sword, then you're proficient with the bastard sword. You can use it one-handed, following all the normal rules for one-handed weapons, including the rule that says you can two-hand it for extra damage.You can use any one-handed weapon by RAW two-handed, gaining all the benefits thereof.
That's part of what I was trying to say, yes.