Observations:
1. The katana should be a Slashing and a Piercing weapon. After all the tip of the katana was pointed, similar to that of a spear so that it could be used to punch through thick armors if the need arose.
2. The katana should be finessable. While the katana was traditionally wielded with two hands, Miyamoto Musashi developed a revolutionary and adaptive combat style - the "Two Swords" - that utilized the katana in one hand so the other could perform various other actions (including wielding a wakizashi). This style favored precise killing strikes to defeat opponents quickly.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ok, more shower inspired thoughts*
Katana
Wakazashi
As to Stynkk's post above.
1) The long sword also has a point and is good for poking through things. It also has a crossbar which is ideal for smashing people in the face. Should it be B/P/S? No. The types are a bit more abstract. Slashing it should remain.
2) Musashi was a) an exceptional swordsman and b) a quasi mythical figure. There are fensing manuals (amd masters) in the west that can claim some remarkable feats. Musashi's skill comes from his level, not his sharp and pointy. (I don't think oars are finessable weapons either)
*
1. The katana should be a Slashing and a Piercing weapon. After all the tip of the katana was pointed, similar to that of a spear so that it could be used to punch through thick armors if the need arose.
While true that it has a point, I seem to recall a number of other weapons that do not exactly get every damage type they are possible of.
Dagger, punching: It has an edge you can slash with.
Sickle: It has a point that can do piercing, like a tiny scythe.
Shortspear/Longspear/Spear: Most times these will have enough of an edge that people slashed with them too.
Kukri: Does it not also have a point to stab with?
Sword, short: For some reason I can only thrust with my gladius. Odd.
Longsword: <sarcasm>Those totally did not have points, and certainly didn't have techniques to take advantage of that.</sarcasm>
Rapier: These had edges along the rest of the blade and not just the tip.
Scimitar: Has a point at the end. Depending on curve it is awkward, but the point is there and people did use it.
All the polearms: Except for the halberd they all are missing one element of the weapon.
Greatsword: Well in practical use they were used for thrusting more than swinging, giant armor can openers that they were. Sort of a big steel polearm.
Bastard Sword: See Longsword
As Matthew posted while I was still writing, this ignores the pommel totally. The dagger really is the every damage package. Instead the game cares more about the primary means of attack, of which the katana is slashing hands down. And on that, peircing damage has no benefit against armor in the game anyway.
2. The katana should be finessable. While the katana was traditionally wielded with two hands, Miyamoto Musashi developed a revolutionary and adaptive combat style - the "Two Swords" - that utilized the katana in one hand so the other could perform various other actions (including wielding a wakizashi). This style favored precise killing strikes to defeat opponents quickly.
Mushashi developed Niten-Ichi-ryu, a style that was geared to the kind of combat he faced, lone duel encounters and at largest small skirmishes. The case can be made that the techniques would be applicable in warfare, however that is a hard sell. The general title of two-sword style has to do with it teaching a lot of single katana, and single wakazashi movements with a token handful of two-sword movements. It is not that is was totally two-weapon fighting focused. In general terms, the style he taught would represent a particular set of feats taken.
Everyone takes power attack. Killing the other guy is good, killing him harder is better.
On that note, use your katana whenever possible. And two-hand it with power attack. Killing the enemy hardest is best.
As a ronin duelist, there is no need for Mounted Mombat. You probably don't own a horse, and if you can afford to have one you will not be on it when someone tries to fight you. Dodge will help you live longer instead. If you have the Int also look at combat expertise.
What is this Weapon Finesse nonsense? Improved Initiative is much better, as killing your opponent before he can react and hurt you is the supreme outcome.
Who needs cleave? You will not be attacking formations. If you have the Dex for it, two-weapon fighting might be worth while. Since you don't have any mounted combat feats, go ahead and grab two-weapon defense too, as not dying is cool. Even then, it is really situational, probably something best left for encounters where you suspect that you will die because the attack penalty makes you kill your enemy less quickly.
As you will have it with you most of the time, take weapon focus (katana) or (wakazashi) to help you kill your opponent. A more battle focused school of thought would suggest weapon focus (longbow) or (longspear).
I keep all of the feats around the really low or no prerequisite feats for one simple reason. It is at the lower levels where these "fighting school" things are the most help. When you are a level ten, you are essentially better than everyone but the very top masters. The master swordlord would be interested in what you do, and it very much possible that you have made your own fighting school by then if you are so inclined. For the most part "good" swordsmen will be lower than level ten, and you will be beating them just based on level much like it seems some of Musashi's fights went.
Niten-Ichi-ryu is not a two-sword only style. In fact, two-sword techniques are the vast minority of what it teaches (like 20% or less of the overall teaching). All of the techniques are there to teach a concept. The two-sword techniques are concepts, not a direct manual of killing people with two swords is totally best. Here, have a look at this link Notice all of the attacking that is not happening with the small sword during two-sword time? It is there to block, to screw up the usual paradigm of individual sword fighting. For this use, just about anything can work as an off hand item. It is still a very much risky item, as your relying on one hand to fend off his two with much better leverage.
This style favored precise killing strikes to defeat opponents quickly.
I defy you to find a style that does not claim to rely on precise killing strikes. I know there are some, but usually anyone claiming to do something other than "kill my enemy quickly with as few strikes as possible" does not last to long. I do not know a sword school that would say "ignore the vitals and just swing at the organless meat" or "no need to swing at the head, just cut them without discretion, it will be just as good as putting metal in their brain." Under this logic, once again, the bastard sword needs to get finesse too because they did something more fancy than just mongo-smash. This "precision" is taking weapon focus, using power attack to get fatal strikes, and *gasp* having an acceptable strength for a melee combatant. Strength is what governs your blade control and how deftly you can move your blade. In other words, dexterity is your bodily ability to react to incoming hurt and strength governs all of your outgoing hurt. Strength does all of it, even the fancy little blade movements you are thinking of. Weapon finesse does not mean that you fight with more grace, it means that you fight in such a way to make your weak strength less of a disability in an activity that is very strength dependant. How much grace and technique you fight with is totally up to you when describing your character's actions.
The Katana/finessable question could/should be solved with a 'fighting school' feat. For example, give it the prerequisites of EWP (Katana), Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (Katana) maybe Weapon Specialization (Katana) and then allow it to give a shield bonus (+1 or +2) when used two handed, and finessable. I think my saraph is going to go the Martial weapon 1d8 18-20/X2, EWP to use one handed route myself.
The greatsword is far more deserving of this, as well as most of the weapons with an actual signifcant defensive guard of some kind, however none of these get such a bonus. The Aldori Dueling Sword did have a feat that did something like that, but it was like a level 12 fighter feat I think. Regardless, I do not like the idea of making a sword as protective as even a light shield. Perhaps if it were limited to defending oneself in melee only it would make better sense, and it were able to apply to the rest of the weapons that common sense says you can block with. I can hear it now "But what about those guys who cut arrows out of the air, it should apply to ranged attacks too." Look at what those people do. If you want to ready an attack to strike an arrow (AC 20-25?), I am fine with that. Otherwise, no, your blade is not a good defensive item in this case.
The sword, no matter what, is not a shield. If you need an AC boost, get combat expertise or fight defensivley. Having a slightly lower AC in general is how the two-handed fighter pays for the immense amount of extra damage he deals.
Also, why do you seem to think that the wakazashi is one handed only and would need the exotic to use two handed? Like the katana, it is used two-handed 90% of the time for the simple reason that it is silly to choose to deal less damage when you could do more damage. Wakizashi fits the scimitar stats perfectly.
I was looking to buy my special japanese stick, so i can trip people, this is what I found. On another note, the finesse part of the katana could be a ninja trick, or a feat or a samurai class feature. (something along the lines of dervish dance, which i think is broken) But if you really think about it, what samurai isn't going to have a really decent strength? an old yoda one?
If you find dervish dance broken, why suggest it? Given my above, you can guess my own feelings regarding the feat. It is a little insane to allow one stat to govern almost 100% of combat, I do not know why we need to have the samurai, possibly the strongest melee combatant released, to gain this edge. The rogue is in much more need of something like that.
And don't forget, age penalties hit dex just as hard as str.
I'm not going to worry about long drawn out discussion on this, I'm just chiming in my 2cp here.
Note: "shaku" is a term of measurement that roughly corresponds to 1ft/12 inches. Actual values varied by time and place though.
-Wakizashi: Shortsword, slashing type. You could make the argument that a scimitar is closer statistically. However, the scimitar is a larger weapon and that seems less like a wakizashi to me.
-Katana: Aldori Dueling Sword. The stats aren't perfect, but the size, damage and finesse capability of it seems in line. Wield two-handed for more damage or a traditional two-handed katana grip.
-Odachi/Okatana: Elven Curved Blade. These larger katana fit this size and two-handed style sword perfectly. "O" means "long" in these cases. Bear in mind, in feudal Japan, katana were actually made to match the size of their wielder, so the distinction between the odachi/okatana and katana are different when we think of them today compared to how they were made and thought of then. To qualify as an odachi, the blade much be 3 shaku or more in length.
-Nodachi: Greatsword. A nodachi wasn't really used for dueling, more for dismounting cavalry. They were also typically not as well made as katana due to how much more steel went into their making and issues with the tempering process producing the same quality of steel. A nodachi typically averaged a blade around 4 shaku/4 feet. They weren't very common in use due to length of the blade and the strength required to use one. The naginata and nagimaki were considered more efficient weapons for dismounting an opponent in many cases and didn't require as much strength to wield because of their long shafts.
My argument for finesse is that the two classes we especially want to see running around with Katannas should be DEXy. The ninja argument is obvious, but I realize the DEXy samurai is a little contentious, so let me explain: Samurais wear medium and light armor. Also the legendary if historically rare Samurai concept that players are most likely play is the high initiative, musashi-esque speed duelist.
The balance issue mentioned above is that all other things being equal, adding finesse is an additional bonus that makes this power creep over other weapons(specifically the bastard sword). Now I don't see this entering into it with the bastard sword, because characters who are likely to be contemplating bastard sword vs. katana are not going to be your weapon finesse types. I can see the argument that it isn't fair to put the dexterity combatant on equal melee footing as the str combatant, but to do that, the dexterity combatant has to burn a feat on fighting 1 handed after he's already burnt a feat on weapon finesse. Since he probably has a higher dex than str because he is a skill focused and feat deprived class like a rogue or bard, a feat tax is a lot more painful for him. Even if he is a less feat deprived dex warrior like a switch-hitting ranged-to-melee ranger, he's still burning 2 feats on the katanna to be about equal to a STR based ranger who spent 1 feat on the bastard sword... only the STR ranger can do something fun with his extra feat and he's doing more damage because his STR is good. Not seeing how weapon finesse has any significant effect on how the katanna would stack up against the bastard sword.
Now regarding the superiority of critical range over damage, I am partially swayed, but I do not see it as conclusively black and white as you. For starters each point that you extend the crit range, you're extending it downwards on the die, so there is a decreasing chance that the initial threat connects with the AC. I know at higher levels, hitting is sometimes a foregone conclusion because attack bonuses rise a lot faster than AC, but that really only applies for your primary attack. When you can make a full attack (probably about 50% of the time for a frontline melee character) rolling an 18 + your bonus -5 for each subsequent attack -more if you're power attacking, can be anything but a foregone conclusion. And when your -5/-10 secondary attack hits and threatens, you have to make a second hit that is also -5/-10-powerattack to confirm. Meanwhile, everytime you hit with you're massive primary attack bonus, or get lucky on a secondary attack role, you're enjoying that 1 point of additional damage. If you don't think that's significant, then why bother to drop thousands of gold to upgrade your +1 weapon to a +2 (especially since hitting is a forgone conclusion). And one more point: that 1 point of damage get's multiplied everytime you crit- not too shaby since you're crit range with the bastard is 19-20 or 17-20 for keen/improved critical.
1) The long sword also has a point and is good for poking through things. It also has a crossbar which is ideal for smashing people in the face. Should it be B/P/S? No. The types are a bit more abstract. Slashing it should remain.
I find your argument a bit lacking, a Katana has a hilt to smash people in the face. I did not say a word about Bludgeoning damage. However, a very common technique with a katana is to thrust or slash, while many, many other swords were designed more in favor of the slashing (broadsword, scimitar) and others primarily for the piercing (rapier).
Again, the katana should be finessable. The idea behind many katana schools is precision, speed, accuracy. All these things lead to the kill and all these things rely on Dexterity. Strength is important as well, but a well placed strike is more desirable than the strongest strike.
Mushashi developed Niten-Ichi-ryu, a style that was geared to the kind of combat he faced, lone duel encounters and at largest small skirmishes.[...]
Perhaps you didn't see that I wrote that Musashi developed an adaptive combat style. I didn't want to get into a debate about the finer points of Musashi, but we can if you wish. I simply wanted to point out that it was not uncommon to train to wield the katana properly in one hand as well as two.
I defy you to find a style that does not claim to rely on precise killing strikes. I know there are some, but usually anyone claiming to do something other than "kill my enemy quickly with as few strikes as possible" does not last to long. I do not know a sword school that would say "ignore the vitals and just swing at the organless meat" or "no need to swing at the head, just cut them without discretion, it will be just as good as putting metal in their brain."
I see you are a bit skeptical of my meaning, so I'll provide a quote for you...
First of all, when you take up the sword the idea is to kill the opponent. Even though you may catch, hit, or block an opponent's slashing sword, or tie it up or obstruct it, all these moves are opportunities for cutting the opponent down. This must be understood. If you think of catching, think of hitting, think of blocking, think of tying up or think of obstructing, you will thereby become unable to make the kill. It is crucial to think of everything as an opportunity to kill. This should be given careful consideration.
I have seen very, very few other instances that so blatantly call for this attention to fatal detail and the awareness of the killing strike. There is no defense, there is delayed offense. This is probably because Musashi himself engaged in multi-opponent combat regularly. And he we would have taken improved initiative.
This "precision" is taking weapon focus, using power attack to get fatal strikes, and *gasp* having an acceptable strength for a melee combatant. Strength is what governs your blade control and how deftly you can move your blade.
As neither of us are katana masters I don't think we can come to any meaningful conclusion. However, I will say that I think Dexterity has a much larger role than you attribute and I doubt power attack comes into play often, if at all, when referring to the katana.
When it is impossible to strike a killing blow using just one hand, then use two hands to do it. It should not require effort.
You only need to make the strike with the force necessary to win.
Mushsi was a brave fencer who beat people with boat oars.
Mushsi was a brave fencer who beat people with boat oars.
True story.
|
Now regarding the superiority of critical range over damage, I am partially swayed, but I do not see it as conclusively black and white as you. For starters each point that you extend the crit range, you're extending it downwards on the die, so there is a decreasing chance that the initial threat connects with the AC. I know at higher levels, hitting is sometimes a foregone conclusion...
You are correct... but only somewhat. Remember, critical hits don't just multiply weapon damage. They multiply all static modifiers as well.
Let's say you have a keen "Katana" (1d8, 15-20/x2) and a keen Bastard Sword (1d10, 17-20/x2). With all the same strength modifiers, etc., the Bastard sword will edge out the prototype Katana just barely on a 17-20, averaging one more point of damage per hit.
BUT, the prototype Katana will double all static modifiers on a 15 and 16. This means that, 2-14 (if it even hits) and 17-20, the Bastard sword does 1 point of extra damage. If, however, you double ALL of your static modifiers on your crit, are you really saying that the Katana would not produce greater results than the extra ~10 damage over all attacks (bearing in mind chance-to-hit affects the extra 1 point of damage a Bastard sword does)? This doesn't take into account feats that benefit from critical hits, either.
In short, the bigger damage is nice, and at low levels it actually does matter, especially before the crit range can be expanded, and before static modifiers get very large. However, at later levels, with larger static modifiers, the larger crit range will win out every time.
You are correct... but only somewhat. Remember, critical hits don't just multiply weapon damage. They multiply all static modifiers as well.Let's say you have a keen "Katana" (1d8, 15-20/x2) and a keen Bastard Sword (1d10, 17-20/x2). With all the same strength modifiers, etc., the Bastard sword will edge out the prototype Katana just barely on a 17-20, averaging one more point of damage per hit.
BUT, the prototype Katana will double all static modifiers on a 15 and 16. This means that, 2-14 (if it even hits) and 17-20, the Bastard sword does 1 point of extra damage. If, however, you double ALL of your static modifiers on your crit, are you really saying that the Katana would not produce greater results than the extra ~10 damage over all attacks (bearing in mind chance-to-hit affects the extra 1 point of damage a Bastard sword does)? This doesn't take into account feats that benefit from critical hits, either.
In short, the bigger damage is nice, and at low levels it actually does matter, especially before the crit range can be expanded, and before static modifiers get very large. However, at later levels, with larger static modifiers, the larger crit range will win out every time.
18-20 vs 19-20... comes down to 18 (or 15 and 16 in Keen land) yes, you're doubling ALL static modifiers... just under 5% of the time(because not all threats hit and confirm). Even if we simplify things to say that you always hit on a roll over 10 and you always miss on 10 or below (thereby denying the bastard sword its advantage for when low rolls hit) that's a 90% chance per hit that you're better off with the bastard sword. If we're talking keen that's an 80% chance that you're better off with the bastard sword pretending that 2-10 never hit and 15-16 always hit and always confirm. On the unlikely event that the katana out performs the bastard sword it's outperforming it by less than 100% because of the inferior damage range and even more so if you deal any kind of nonstatic extra damage like flaming or sneak attack. It doesn't really pull out ahead until you have feats that add status effects to your crit or magic weapon properties like flaming burst.
Like I said, to a certain extend I concede the point, but I think it is very easy to overstate the advantage, because of some of the things I listed above (you're extending the range downward; full attack produces diminishing likelyhood of crits hitting, full attack produces diminishing likelyhood of crits confirming; the bastard sword has a good crit range itself with more damage per crit). The fact that iterative attacks don't synergize well with crits is an argument that even at higher levels, everything isn't in favor of the crit weapon.
It's true that you can take feats to give even more advantages with crits, but you can take them with your bastard sword too. Since the threat range increases downwards, the crit weapon only outperforms if you hit with a 16 or 15, and your confirmation roll +4 (assuming you burnt a precious midlevel feat) hits as well. An extra point of damage on every hit with a primary or iterative attack, and 2 extra points of damage on every critical(with a threat range starting at 17), doesn't look too shabby vs. the chance to threat on 15's and 16s. The higher crit range still might edge out ahead, but not by too much.
Also there's one thing I forgot- some creatures are immune to critical hits and enemies can have fortification.
|
|
stuff
That's okay. I won't try to convince you otherwise. I will say that dozens upon dozens of DPR and other damage threads support the idea that, on average, higher crit range will more than make up for the lost 1 point of damage. Sure, you get that 1 point consistently, but once you're doubling more than 5 points of damage on that extra crit range, the weapons even out in the long run, and any more extra damage is just icing on the cake.
Again, that's only concerning average damage.
Mushsi was a brave fencer who beat people with boat oars.But were they finessable oars?
I don't think Musashi finessed anything personally.
stuffOh dervish dance is totally broken, there is no reason or call for it, other than "we want it", it's a min maxer munchkin night mare.
But, whats good for the goose is good for the gander, if it's there and it already exists (where it shouldnt) I can see no way something like this wouldnt apply to a ninja or samurai with a katana (where it is totally more appropriate).
It's kinda of like: Why on God's green earth can a light saber cut through blast doors that shooting blasters at repeatedly couldnt accomplish the same feat?
Why do light sabers never run out of energy, but the same technology can't be applied to a blaster?
The answer " we want it"
If you can make bugs bunny "hassan chop" sword finessable then you can do the same thing with the katana, using a feat.
I dont like it, but apples should be apples.
I think if more of you actually owned and trained with katanas for a good long time, you would find that the haters are wrong about how average and lame they dearly wish the katana to be, and likewise the fanbois would find it is not worth selling your firstborn child over.
The katana is, in many ways, a superiorly crafted and incredibly effective weapon. One of the best swords made by man. Is it the ONLY sword made by man or the only sword worth wielding? No. But you haters ought to learn something about how they were crafted, how strong and flexible they were compared to other blades, why they hold their edges so well, etc. Those things are testable facts. Really. Tested in labs, and everything.
I am not a fanboi. I, too, dislike rabid, blind devotion. But after years of learning and training, I can't escape the excellence and quality that goes into crafting these weapons.
That said, there are some major differences in how a bastard sword is handled versus how a katana is. However, this game does not really ever deal specifically with the real world style of bastard sword use in any meaningful way, mechanics-wise. And as to finesse with the katana, in practice you wouldn't be finessing it around like you see in the movies. The intent is a quick, single and graceful cut that fells your opponent without fuss so you can move on to the next. A two-handed/one-handed style is actually quite natural, but it doesn't look like Tom Cruise in the Last Samurai. It is a matter of practical extension of the body and adjustment of the grip.
Additionally, the ways in which the katana best differs from the bastard sword in quality have to do with things most groups never bother to deal with, such as matters of sundering, disarming, etc. It has to do with the quality of the thing, and the different points of strength in the steel. If it needed a separate block, it really should concentrate on Hardness and the like.
stuffThat's okay. I won't try to convince you otherwise. I will say that dozens upon dozens of DPR and other damage threads support the idea that, on average, higher crit range will more than make up for the lost 1 point of damage. Sure, you get that 1 point consistently, but once you're doubling more than 5 points of damage on that extra crit range, the weapons even out in the long run, and any more extra damage is just icing on the cake.
Again, that's only concerning average damage.
Well since these threads are not present I will not try to ask them about the ideas they support, but I will say that your non-attempt to convince me otherwise pretends that threat = crit.
As this applies to the topic at hand, I think that the superiority of this prototypical katana is present but so negligible as to be insignificant. Therefore I stick by the finessable bastard sword that does 1d8 18-20x2, unless someone has some good arguments against the finessable part.
Re: Davor explaining threat range.
-Goodness thank you. I was thinking about setting up a DPS chart for that one.
Re: Stynnk
-Please take nothing I have said or challenged personally. I do enjoy the spirited exchange and apologize if some of my stronger worded claims of challenges came off as overly confrontational. I hope to be able to keep up this exchange of ideas. In a large part I wish to come to understand what you propose and the reasons why, while making the case for my own conclusions of course.
As for further clarification on previous points. My list of weapons was not the end all for this. It is an issue much larger than just the katana. Weapons do not get all the damage types frequently associated with them, and pommeling is a loud absence in the rules in general that the -4 nonlethal strike does not actually cover whatsoever, in favor of leaving only the absolute most commonly represented attack form in the rules.
Also, as a general statement I fear that this discussion is becoming too Musashi focused, which is partially my fault for continuing to reference him from time to time. In the large scale he is a historical oddity, and I view him mostly as a legend and historical curiosity. Due to this legendary and very factually murky character, this same murk begins to overtake more practical points.
With that out of the way, back to the fray.
My argument for finesse is that the two classes we especially want to see running around with Katannas should be DEXy. The ninja argument is obvious, but I realize the DEXy samurai is a little contentious, so let me explain: Samurais wear medium and light armor. Also the legendary if historically rare Samurai concept that players are most likely play is the high initiative, musashi-esque speed duelist.
No argument about ninjas being dexterity based. With their sneak attack delivering most of their damage they have little need for strength as it ties to damage. Weapon finesse makes perfect sense in that event, as they then can load all of their combat ability on dexterity. Sneak attack is precision strikes, and it is sneak attack that invalidates strength's necessity as a combat score.
Samurai wear heavy armor. The playtest gives them the proficencey in heavy armor, and samurai armor would likely be somewhere around scale on the light end and banded mail on the heavy end. However, I suspect that they will do as Oriental Adventures did and just rename the fullplate as O-yoroi and went from there.
Certainly the skilled ronin duelist is an awesome character concept. The rule of cool is with this one. I do not argue this. The issue I take is the requirement of weapon finesse for this character concept to work. Dexterity already governs initiative and unarmored AC, and with improved initiative the benefits are even more pronounced. My argument is not that this character type is bad but rather than weapon finesse has nothing to do with it. If we modeled our duelist as a rogue, which is not 100% out of the realm of possibility, you do indeed get a melee combatant focused on killing men with precision strikes and no reliance of his strength.
This still ignores the fact that finesse is a quality of the weapon, and the katana has no qualities in line with a finesse weapon.
The balance issue mentioned above is that all other things being equal, adding finesse is an additional bonus that makes this power creep over other weapons(specifically the bastard sword). Now I don't see this entering into it with the bastard sword, because characters who are likely to be contemplating bastard sword vs. katana are not going to be your weapon finesse types. I can see the argument that it isn't fair to put the dexterity combatant on equal melee footing as the str combatant, but to do that, the dexterity combatant has to burn a feat on fighting 1 handed after he's already burnt a feat on weapon finesse.
First part to get it out of the way, the samurai and ninja indeed do have full exotic katana proficiency as written in the playetest.
Well, yes, adding finesse by necessity does make it beyond a bastard sword on some level. I am unsure who will be thinking between bastard sword and katana for any strong game reason to begin with. Also, if finesse is part of a weapon it will be for the weapon, one-handed or two-handed in virtually all cases and would not require the exotic feat. Also, the dexterity combatant is worse off than the strength one in another important area: damage. This issue is even more pronounced if the strength fighter is using a two-handed weapon with power attack and the finesse fighter can neither two-hand with finesse or else is unable to use power attack. There is the added problem that if the weapon finesse guy is keeping up with his strength to keep a competitive damage, weapon finesse will really have been a basically wasted feat.
Since he probably has a higher dex than str because he is a skill focused and feat deprived class like a rogue or bard, a feat tax is a lot more painful for him. Even if he is a less feat deprived dex warrior like a switch-hitting ranged-to-melee ranger, he's still burning 2 feats on the katanna to be about equal to a STR based ranger who spent 1 feat on the bastard sword... only the STR ranger can do something fun with his extra feat and he's doing more damage because his STR is good. Not seeing how weapon finesse has any significant effect on how the katanna would stack up against the bastard sword.
The ranger has incentive to have a good strength too for ranged, as the composite bow is almost a requirement for ranged damage. And it is important to note that in general, the ranger is not a good combatant. Outside of fighting his favored enemy, he is about on par with an NPC warrior that gets a few more feats, with a few cool spells and a killer pet. The ranger though benefits best from having a good dex and strength at the same time. Weapon finesse is not for him as the returns will be really small to non-existant. Think of it like this, the ranger is shooting for a 15 dex and 15 str to keep is ranged and melee damage up at the same time. A lot of rogue concepts are the 20 dex 8 str character because they don't care about str bonus to damage when they have sneak attack. For that character, weapon finesse is a must.
The significant of the finesse effect is the very nature of balancing a weapon against another weapon, then just adding more stuff after getting it set to be in line with the other item. And I will further restate, the katana has nothing in common with the line of finesse weapons. Finesse has something to do with the weapon's manufacture and design being such that strength is less important to its use. Shame to say that the katana does rely on your, as the text calls strength, "muscle and physical power" for the majority of its effect. The case for the rapier being able to rely more on dex, or "agility, reflexes, and balance" as the text puts it, is a much easier case to make. Certainly dex is important to combat with both, but that potential for agility and reflex being used to attack are way more heavily represented with the rapier's construction than the katana.
I find your argument a bit lacking, a Katana has a hilt to smash people in the face. I did not say a word about Bludgeoning damage. However, a very common technique with a katana is to thrust or slash, while many, many other swords were designed more in favor of the slashing (broadsword, scimitar) and others primarily for the piercing (rapier).
Forgive me if I am reading too much into your words. The hand-and-a-half swords had not uncommon techniques where the combatant actually held the object by the blade and struck with the cross-guard, using the sword as a mace and the cross-guard had often times been built to accommodate this type of use. And certainly the common half-sword technique to penetrate armor, as well as conventional thrusts from a regular grip would count as meriting piercing damage. I certainly agree that the katana should be slashing and piercing. To keep in following with the game though the katana should be slashing as this is the primary use of the blade and follows its prestigious curved blade status. If the katana were to get the piercing damage, I would very much like to see similar additions placed on the other weapons that certainly could merit the modification.
Again, the katana should be finessable. The idea behind many katana schools is precision, speed, accuracy. All these things lead to the kill and all these things rely on Dexterity. Strength is important as well, but a well placed strike is more desirable than the strongest strike.
This I can more clearly share my differing opinion on.
By the dictionary definition of the word dexterity you would be correct. However, the nature of the strength stat makes it govern precision/accuracy/speed of your strikes in D&D. It is essentially the "attack" stat, while dexterity is the "defense" stat. Another side effect of this is that a dex based melee combatant will lag behind a strength based one because of the lack of bonus damage. Indeed, rather than ending the fight with a handful of significant decisive precise strikes, the weapon finesse fighter is relying on taking his opponent down through a swarm of weaker strikes over the course of several rounds which is very much against the theory present in many Japanese martial arts. Because criticals are out of the control of the player, there is no distinction between strong and well placed strikes, other than how you describe in game, in this instance and because of the broad scope of the strength stat there is no reason to think that they do not overlap in game.Perhaps you didn't see that I wrote that Musashi developed an adaptive combat style. I didn't want to get into a debate about the finer points of Musashi, but we can if you wish. I simply wanted to point out that it was not uncommon to train to wield the katana properly in one hand as well as two.
Agreed, no need for this to become another derailed katana thread.
Uncommon, no. Optimal, no. Even so, it is an important skill to have and integral to mastery of the weapon, as opposed to just using it.I have seen very, very few other instances that so blatantly call for this attention to fatal detail and the awareness of the killing strike. There is no defense, there is delayed offense. This is probably because Musashi himself engaged in multi-opponent combat regularly. And he we would have taken improved initiative.
That quote from Musashi, while having deep implications in the real world, means only one thing in game terms. He is saying "Attack, and do so at a high bonus. Kill your opponent, that is the best way to defend yourself. Attack and do not spend turns tripping or disarming or other nonsense that does not deal damage." And in game, this is correct 99% of the time.
As neither of us are katana masters I don't think we can come to any meaningful conclusion. However, I will say that I think Dexterity has a much larger role than you attribute and I doubt power attack comes into play often, if at all, when referring to the katana.
As we are both people of sound reasoning capability we have no need to be masters of the katana for this issue. We are just talking about the mechanical aspect of the representation of the weapon in an abstract game. A game with which many here are quite familiar with, if not all masters. Anyone with the power to use sound reasoning has the ability to offer valid input.
At the risk of redundancy I do hold my stance that accurate killing blows come from the strength stat in-game. The term dexterity is a good descriptor, but in this case the strength stat is the exact physical function needed as described in the book. Even with this in mind, dexterity is still essentially a God stat to any physical character with the wide range of things it does. Also, as I noted the lack of distinction the game makes between raw mongo-smash damage and a focused, well-placed attack; power attack is totally appropriate to model an attack aimed to kill. Look at the deadly aim feat for ranged attacks, where the exact same mechanic is used to describe an attack of uncanny precision. Added to that, a melee character without power attack will almost invariably fall behind one that does with regards to overall damage output which surely is not wanted. With this in mind I am curious why you say that power attack would not be used.
You only need to make the strike with the force necessary to win.
In stark contrast with real-life, the game makes such killing strikes virtually impossible to predict after a certain level, and also makes single strike kills impossible events after a certain point in the power curve provided you fight worthy threats on each count. The only time when you can know with a strong degree of certainty the outcome of your strike to be fatal is when fighting very much lower level opponents, or else yourself being still low level fighting other low levels. Against such low threats, why not just one-hand?
Re: edross and criticals
-Here is the main DPR threat complete with a formula for use if you so choose to check the math for yourself. These sentences are both the link.
Re:Brunnwald
-Sorry to say but you sound like a fanboy. Calling people who disagree with the finesse aspect haters and implying that these people wish to make the katana lame out of their own insecurity over European blades is a little hostile. At least that is all I can gather out of that remark.
Also, you seem to assume that this hate of the katana comes from ignorance of the weapon. A lack of understanding of its construction and other fine properties. The Europeans were not without their own significant smithing styles like the Celts and their swords. Add to that the fairly strong lack of innovation present in the katana design, where European blades remained dynamic and every chancing as time moved on, they sought to create the ever more effective and efficient blade for the conditions they had. The katana is probably one of the finest examples of its type, the large saber, which was perfect for battle conditions in Japan.
As far as finesse is concerned though, the katana has as much business being a finesse weapon as the grosse messer, kriegsmesser, and falchion.
The game for some reason makes no distinction between iron and steel. If it ever came up, I would suggest using mithral hardness and hit points as it says it is just as durable as steel. I am interested to hear what sundering or disarm items you suggest.
*silently wonders if paizo is reading all this*
Flacata > Katana
Evedentiary support Japan didn't concur a big chunk of the world.
-fanfan-
@The_Normal_Anomaly
Nothing personal, just trying to get the facts straight and communicate about the Katana.
About Musashi: He was a legendary figure, yes. Something like a Hero. Something like the characters we make here in Pathfinder.
IMO - Samurai should max out at medium armor proficiency. Their armor was not exceptionally heavy and allowed for extreme mobility, which is why I have and will continue to argue for Dexterity based classes for the Ninja and Samurai. This includes Weapon Finesse for the Katana.
I certainly agree that the katana should be slashing and piercing. To keep in following with the game though the katana should be slashing as this is the primary use of the blade and follows its prestigious curved blade status. If the katana were to get the piercing damage, I would very much like to see similar additions placed on the other weapons that certainly could merit the modification.
I think we are in agreement about the damage types. I too would like to see an expanding of damage types for some weapons, but largely I find them accurate with a few exceptions. Actually, reviewing the list I think the only change I'd make would be to change Short Sword to S and add a new weapon called a "Gladius" that has P as its damage type.
However, you must remember that not all Katanas had a curved blade, there existed many forms of katana of varying degrees of curvature (or none at all during the initial implementation of katana).
I can see your argument about the primary function of the katana to slash, but I don't have a problem with S/P for the Katana. Especially since the tip was specifically designed to punch through the laquered lamellar armour of the other samurai.
However, the nature of the strength stat makes it govern precision/accuracy/speed of your strikes in D&D. It is essentially the "attack" stat, while dexterity is the "defense" stat. Another side effect of this is that a dex based melee combatant will lag behind a strength based one because of the lack of bonus damage.
I still would like to see Weapon Finesse affect the Katana, and we can give the Samurai weapon specialization (katana) to account for some of the damage they are losing. But, I have to point out, nothing is stopping you from having excellent scores in both strength and good dexterity... I like Multi Ability Dependent classes. They are challenging to play.
Look at the deadly aim feat for ranged attacks, where the exact same mechanic is used to describe an attack of uncanny precision. Added to that, a melee character without power attack will almost invariably fall behind one that does with regards to overall damage output which surely is not wanted. With this in mind I am curious why you say that power attack would not be used.
I am pleased with Power Attack's representation of "power". Less so with deadly aim. I would have much rather had something like Arcane Strike for Ranged Attackers. Use a swift action to "aim" and take a more careful shot, giving you some kind of scaling damage boost on ranged attack damage. Reducing ranged attack rolls to increase damage makes little sense except to conform to game terminology and mirror the existing Power Attack.
The comment on Power Attack was coming from a real world environment. A real world samurai would certainly not sacrifice accuracy for power.
The katana should not be finessable. This would make it too good.
It was/is good. What advantage does weapon finesse give you? The_Normal_Anomaly thinks that STR is absolutely essential for the Katana to function.
Seeing as how the soldiers that wielded Katanas only wore medium, light and no armor, I fail to see how Weapon Finesse would be a bad thing. We could even put the clause in, if you wear Heavy Armor then no Weapon Finesse.
Also, I don't think the ninja should be able to use it. It's not a ninja weapon. It's a soldier's weapon.
... Ninjas used any weapon(s) they could and likely had and used katanas in real life, as they dominated the region at the time. In game terms, even if they have to take a feat to wield it, they could get it, just like a sorcerer can get a Falcata.
|
|
As this applies to the topic at hand, I think that the superiority of this prototypical katana is present but so negligible as to be insignificant. Therefore I stick by the finessable bastard sword that does 1d8 18-20x2, unless someone has some good arguments against the finessable part.
I agree with you in almost every way. The reason I say that the Katana should be the 1d8, 18-20/x2 slashing weapon is because there is already established precedence for the balance for this. Just look at Longsword/Scimitar or Longsword/Rapier. Both weapons are the same "category" of weapon, but the scimitar reduces the damage by one dice step while increasing the crit range by 1 step. That's why the damage dice and crit range of the suggested katana work. There's already established precedent. Less work overall.
Regarding finesse, I could see it working, but it doesn't seem like it'd be a finessable weapon... at first. I think it should have something like Dervish Dance, but for the Katana. It might read like...
Prerequisite: Proficiency with Katana, Weapon Finesse, 3rd Level
You use add your Dexterity modifier to attack and damage rolls while wielding a single Katana and no other weapons. You do not add extra damage from your Dexterity for wielding the weapon in two hands.
Of course, I also feel that Ninjas shouldn't start off with Katana proficiency at all, but /shrug.
|
|
The katana should not be finessable. This would make it too good.
Also, I don't think the ninja should be able to use it. It's not a ninja weapon. It's a soldier's weapon.
..........
Of course, I also feel that Ninjas shouldn't start off with Katana proficiency at all, but /shrug.
A ninja is well versed in almost every weapon that is/was around in Japan during their use.
Granted, they didn't use the very oversized weapons that mounted cavalry might have. The Katana was the largest weapon generally they used.Now looking back to what the game designers intend (IMO); This is a fantasy game. Attributing it too much to reality would be pointless for a fun & enjoyable game. So they are going to allow leigh way on themes, but they are not going to put something stupendously silly in there either (like a fencer finessing the glaive).
|
|
Now looking back to what the game designers intend (IMO); This is a fantasy game. Attributing it too much to reality would be pointless for a fun & enjoyable game. So they are going to allow leigh way on themes, but they are not going to put something stupendously silly in there either (like a fencer finessing the glaive).
My only problem with giving Ninjas katana proficiency off the bat is that it doesn't line up with the current Rogue. I'd like to see maybe an Archetype for the ninja that gives up something simple for katana proficiency (like the Swashbuckler or something), but by itself it's one of those things that just SCREAMS "I'm better than the Rogue!" Since it's based on the Rogue, I feel it should mirror the power level of the Rogue somewhat closely. Now, that's another discussion altogether, but the proficiencies are something that can be easily modified with little effect on the effectiveness of the character.
|
|
My only problem with giving Ninjas katana proficiency off the bat is that it doesn't line up with the current Rogue. I'd like to see maybe an Archetype for the ninja that gives up something simple for katana proficiency (like the Swashbuckler or something), but by itself it's one of those things that just SCREAMS "I'm better than the Rogue!" Since it's based on the Rogue, I feel it should mirror the power level of the Rogue somewhat closely. Now, that's another discussion altogether, but the proficiencies are something that can be easily modified with little effect on the effectiveness of the character.
I have viewed the rogue and ninja, and i honestly feel that a rogue is just as affective as a ninja. Also, a ninja is just another variant of the rogue class, granted it has it's own class stats rather than using the rogue talents. The Ki does not give it that huge of a advantage.
If you want to yell about broken, look at barbarians!! Damage reduction at level 2 to a class that already has d12 hit dice, now that is whacked.
I hope they fix the whole ninja trick/rogue talent thing, and ninja could take katana as a trick/talent if they wanted it.
I really think ninja should just be a style of rogue and not get a bundle of extra stuff. If you want to add the extra stuff just make it an update to rogues (I.e new talents) there could be a talent and major talent allowing something like flurry of shuriken with anything like daggers, shuriken darts etc.
But yea, i don't think it's right for the ninja to get a bigger more powerful melee weapon and lose nothing andd gain a whole bunch more things.
But again I'm really hoping ninja gets nerfed a little and molded a little more into rogue than out of rogue.
|
Should the rogue get proficiency in longsword or bastard sword, because those were weapons used in Europe?
No. That's silly.
Should the rogue get proficiency in falcata because rogues in real life used any weapon they could get their hands on?
No. That's also silly.
These are not good justifications for granting proficiency to a class. The katana is a warrior's weapon, meant to be wielded with strength. It's a front-line weapon. The infiltrator shouldn't get it.
Making the katana finessable creates entirely new character schema for the game. Suddenly, there's a good weapon that can be finessed, and it can be wielded with either one or both hands. Notice that only one of the currently finessable weapons can be wielded with two hands, and it is a two-handed weapon. I believe that this is a design decision, that there are no finessable weapons that can be wielded with either a one-handed grip or a two-handed grip.
The samurai class is just fine as a strength-based class. They are, after all, front-line warriors and damage dealers, just as much as the cavalier is.
Should the rogue get proficiency in longsword or bastard sword, because those were weapons used in Europe?
No. That's silly.
Should the rogue get proficiency in falcata because rogues in real life used any weapon they could get their hands on?
No. That's also silly.
I invite you to my earlier post:
... Ninjas used any weapon(s) they could and likely had and used katanas in real life, as they dominated the region at the time. In game terms, even if they have to take a feat to wield it, they could get it, just like a sorcerer can get a Falcata [with exotic weapon proficiency].
Ninjas using a katana is ICONIC to a ninja, like wizards using staves or gunslingers using *gasp* guns. How many ninja references have you seen where they do not use katanas?
Few. That's how many.
Should Elves get automatic proficiency with longswords? Do all elves train with longswords? Every single one, ever? I guess so!
Making the katana finessable creates entirely new character schema for the game. Suddenly, there's a good weapon that can be finessed, and it can be wielded with either one or both hands. Notice that only one of the currently finessable weapons can be wielded with two hands, and it is a two-handed weapon. I believe that this is a design decision, that there are no finessable weapons that can be wielded with either a one-handed grip or a two-handed grip
Does it matter that it can be wielded with one or two hands? It may be a design decision, but what has it yielded? Honestly, you CAN wield a rapier (or any light finessable weapon) with two hands, you just don't get 1.5x STR, just 1x.
You can use Weapon Finesse with an Aldori Dueling Sword, Elven Curved Blade AND a Spiked Chain they are all two handed weapons. The ADS exists already and can be used in one or two hands at normal effect. Not seeing any advantage the prototype katana has here...
I'd be fine with it only being 1x on str if used in two hands as long as it got weapon finesse. But if they decided to write it like the Aldori Dueling Sword I'd be fine.
These classes should feel unique.
I think the point is that some people don't want it to just be about the numbers and for it to be a "Strength-based class" alone. When creating a character like this, I would want to make something different than a standard cavalier or fighter. That's kinda the point, otherwise I'd just play those base classes instead of this archetype/alternate class.
And there are two finesse weapons, the Elven Curved Blade and the Aldori Dueling Sword (which is physically described to look rather like a katana, btw). The ADS can be used one or two handed (for extra damage).
Ninjas using a katana is ICONIC to a ninja, like wizards using staves or gunslingers using *gasp* guns. How many ninja references have you seen where they do not use katanas?
Few. That's how many.
Gunslinger is a weapon master. No duh it is a gun class.
Wizards do tend to carry sticks.Ninjas have a boatload of weapons that are associated with them. What screams ninja more, shuriken or katana? One was used by ninjas, the other was made by ninjas. And lets not forget that silly ninja-to the movies invented.
Should Elves get automatic proficiency with longswords? Do all elves train with longswords? Every single one, ever? I guess so!
Yep, they all do. Something about them fencing and shooting bows all the time while growing up. Thing is that is like twenty years of fencing and bow shooting. I am sure a few do not get it, God knows the forlorn shouldn't. And if I remember right they have some manditory Switzerland-like militia service to make sure they know their sword and bow. As it stands it is the DMs job to yank that from characters that should not have it, but more than 99% of elf characters probably should get it.
Does it matter that it can be wielded with one or two hands? It may be a design decision, but what has it yielded? Honestly, you CAN wield a rapier (or any light finessable weapon) with two hands, you just don't get 1.5x STR, just 1x.
Yes, and the rapier is a special case of a weapon that gets very little benefit from the second hand because of its design. Call it a design trade that allows for finesse in a weapon that happens to not be garbage. The katana bears no mark of this trade-off particular.
You can use Weapon Finesse with an Aldori Dueling Sword, Elven Curved Blade AND a Spiked Chain they are all two handed weapons. The ADS exists already and can be used in one or two hands at normal effect. Not seeing any advantage the prototype katana has here...
Sir, without seeking to offend, I question your powers of observation.
The aldori dueling sword is a 1d8 19-20/x2 one-handed that no class is directly proficent with (read: everyone has to waste the exotic feat, even the fighter variant built for the weapon) that takes an exotic weapon proficencey before you can use weapon finesse with it. Before weapon finesse it is treated as a regular longsword for the purpose of feats. The exotic weapon prof simply allows for the finesse to apply. The katana is 1d8 18-20/x2 one-handed exotic/two-handed martial which is, well, an advantage. Past that two classes will be starting with full proficencey in this weapon.
The katana is better than the aldori dueling sword in damage.
The elven curve blade is overly strong and is, next to the falcata, the best exotic weapon just because of the 1d10 18-20/x2. Elves only get the thing for martial. The katana's two-handed use is just martial, as is correct, and is available to everyone without the need to spend a feat. Not all characters who use one would always, or even frequently, care to burn the exotic weapon prof to get the one-handed use at no penalty. Add to that the ability to use one-handed at all makes it very much more versatile. For example . . .
Damage: You can inflict damage to your target equal to your unarmed strike, a natural attack, or an attack made with armor spikes or a light or one-handed weapon. This damage can be either lethal or nonlethal.
You can not grapple with a spiked chain or elven curve blade.
The spiked chain has lower overall damage output because of it being a 2d4 x2 two-handed weapon. In addition, no class is proficent with it.
I'd be fine with it only being 1x on str if used in two hands as long as it got weapon finesse. But if they decided to write it like the Aldori Dueling Sword I'd be fine.
I ask how that makes even remote sense that such a blade would not gain 1.5 str to damage when two-handed. The katana is not a big exotic rapier. It is a slightly larger saber. It should follow the conventions of such and it has been shown already that even without finesse, the katana is virtually the best sword on the market. The vast majority of its use precludes the notion that the second hand was never important to the katana.
I think the point is that some people don't want it to just be about the numbers and for it to be a "Strength-based class" alone. When creating a character like this, I would want to make something different than a standard cavalier or fighter. That's kinda the point, otherwise I'd just play those base classes instead of this archetype/alternate class.
These classes should feel unique.
Should, and do not. That was not the design goal. The design goal was to make a monk+fighter = gunslinger, monk+rogue = ninja, and cavalier+figher = samurai. These classes are basically meant as prepackaged multiclasses with a few unique abilities to hide that they are just multiclass classes. So what we have from the ninja is a rogue with extra superpowers but less ability to find traps. The cavalier loses most of the mount stuff in favor of getting fighter feats with one weapon and that resolve stuff. These classes, by definition here, are not unique as they essentially just steal mechanics from other classes to work.
Adding finesse to the katana solves none of these problems.
The base classes are in general much better fitting samurai and ninja concepts. Ninja is a job and samurai is a hereditary title. Just because you do not have the class does not mean you can not be a samurai or ninja. The weapon master fighter can make a rockin' katana ronin. The spy rogue is a dandy ninja.
IMO a katana should be:
1d8 (19-20/x3) Martial (2h), Exotic (1h) S/P
This weapon can benefit from Weapon Finesse
Ninjas have a boatload of weapons that are associated with them. What screams ninja more, shuriken or katana? One was used by ninjas, the other was made by ninjas. And lets not forget that silly ninja-to the movies invented.
And what does just about every one of those shuriken chucking ninjas have strapped on their backs? It isn't a giant shuriken, I'll tell you that.
Sir, without seeking Sir, without seeking to offend, I question your powers of observation.
You didn't but I'm going to act tough :)
You can not grapple with a spiked chain or elven curve blade.
Really Bucko? (pretty cool no?) You can grapple with a Spiked Chain or an Elven Curved Blade because you only need one hand free. Switch the weapon to one hand (free action) and grab. You won't be wielding a weapon anymore to threaten, but you can sure grapple. And not grappling with a Spiked Chain? Really? Doesnt that seem like something you'd want to grapple someone with?
But I digress, I think you mean you can't deal damage during a grapple with either of the above weapons. Well.. get some armor spikes? I don't really see what this has to do with the design of the katana, but I played along. My counter point is: the vast majority of the samurai did not grapple and stab their opponents in the face with their katana?
I ask how that makes even remote sense that such a blade would not gain 1.5 str to damage when two-handed. The katana is not a big exotic rapier.
I fail to see your point as you have continually failed to see my point - that Samurai and Ninja valued Dexterity over Strength. The point of the katana is that it is a well balanced weapon, for both offense and defense. And the weapon comes from a background that valued speed and precision rather than brute force. If that does not scream weapon finesse then I don't think I can convince you.
It should follow the conventions of such and it has been shown already that even without finesse, the katana is virtually the best sword on the market. The vast majority of its use precludes the notion that the second hand was never important to the katana.
Perhaps this is where you are misguided... the second hand was very important and most/many katana schools/forms religiously advocated the use of two hands to wield the blade. It was not until Musashi that the one handed katana style started to appear and flourish as many found the katana unwieldy to use in a single hand and it required even further training to employ correctly.
The base classes are in general much better fitting samurai and ninja concepts. Ninja is a job and samurai is a hereditary title. Just because you do not have the class does not mean you can not be a samurai or ninja. The weapon master fighter can make a rockin' katana ronin. The spy rogue is a dandy ninja.
Your response to my (and other's urging) to make the Samurai/Ninja more akin to their functions in reality and less conforming to the PFRPG ruleset (where str = fighter) is to make our own? Then I am struggling to find a reason that Paizo should continue designing these classes.
Just because the katana has the capability to be used as a finesse weapon does not mean you cannot forgo it and use it as a normal melee weapon (where str = king).
|
|
I see a lot of people posting real-life examples of the use of the katana, and that's great.
However, do you think that Dexterity wasn't important using European weaponry? I hate to break it to you, but maneuverability is important to EVERY martial art form, Japanese or not. Precision is important to EVERY art form, no matter where you're from or how your weapon is designed (save for a few exceptions).
I say that to say this: The system is an abstraction of reality. You can make real-life arguments all day and it won't matter a bit once an in-game combat situation arises.
Sure, you COULD stab somebody with a Katana, and you COULD stab somebody with a Longsword/Scimitar. You COULD slash at somebody with a Rapier. The point is that these weapons exist to fill a certain niche within the system, not represent real-life as accurately as possible.
That said, there is no reason to make a Katana finessable, just like the Bastard Sword doesn't need to be finessable, the Longsword doesn't need to be finessable, and the Battleaxe doesn't need to be finessable. If you are looking for that kind of thing, ask for a Feat or Feat Chain in Ultimate Combat that does something similar to Dervish Dance for the Katana. A large slashing weapon doesn't need to get weapon finesse and give it more options than the Bastard Sword it's based on.
Note that finesse means the ability to wield a weapon with a fine amount of control, and little strength.
It does NOT mean you move the weapon faster. Speed and control of a heavy weapon are a function of your strength, and your SKILL becomes your accuracy at putting it where you want it, even if your 'fine motor skills' happen to be low.
A katana is a heavy slashing weapon. Giving it finesse as secondary, like the Aldori, is certainly possible.
I'd also note that just about any bladed weapon should be S or P, not S/P, defaulting to one or the other, possibly with a penalty to hit. A short sword is not made to slice or hack. A Katana is not really made to thrust with. Both can be used that way, but the katana is a slicing weapon by design. Even longswords, which are long and straight, are hacking weapons, not thrusting weapons...but thrusts play an important part in masterful wielding of them.
Give swords S or P as needed, and they once again become the pre-eminent weapons that they were meant to be for personal combat. Note that does NOT mean mass combat...blud and pierce, via flails/hammers and spears, rules that domain.
==Aelryinth
I'd also note that just about any bladed weapon should be S or P, not S/P, defaulting to one or the other, possibly with a penalty to hit. A short sword is not made to slice or hack. A Katana is not really made to thrust with. Both can be used that way, but the katana is a slicing weapon by design. Even longswords, which are long and straight, are hacking weapons, not thrusting weapons...but thrusts play an important part in masterful wielding of them.
Give swords S or P as needed, and they once again become the pre-eminent weapons that they were meant to be for personal combat. Note that does NOT mean mass combat...blud and pierce, via flails/hammers and spears, rules that domain.
So do you object to weapons such as the Halberd (P or S), Scythe (P or S), Morningstar (B or P), Dagger (P or S), Cestus (B or P), Bec-de-Corbin (B or P) and Lucerne Hammer (B or P)?
All the weapons listed are either simple or martial, I did not go into the exotic weapons but there are more weapons with multiple damage types.
The strong piercing tip of the katana/wakizashi/tanto was a major function of the weapon, even if it is now characterized by it's curved blade. Much like a Halberd's spike is given credence by Paizo (and how often does a scythe not slash?). As I posted before, the Katana didn't even have a curved blade initially.
Well, the scythe is definitely not designed to be used in a piercing fashion...that's a hacking blow, much like an axe. I think one of the means of determining primary damage is slash = hacking motion, pierce = thrusting motion, and blud = wallop'em. The scythe being used that way is like a pick, but it doesn't have the tip design to really pull it off except against unarmored creatures.
The others are mostly bladed weapons. I believe morningstars are already B/P by design, and you could add the same thing to flails without a problem. Pole-arms, yeah, largely multifunctional, lose something, give up something. I believe a halberd is actually designed to be usable with all three dmg types...spear spike, axe head, and hammer backer.
==Aelryinth
It is interesting that you state a short sword was not made to slice or hack, but would you say the wakizashi (japanese short sword) was made to slash? It is, for all intents and purposes, a smaller version of the katana.
Most curved blades are primarily made to slice, not hack, and not thrust. It would come down to weight and ease of use...you could argue either way, but it's definitely not a hack-worthy weapon like the katana, which is why it's pierce primary.
The katana is primary slice, secondary hack, tertiary thrust. So, it's a slasher.
The waki is primary slice, secondary pierce. So, it's a piercer. You generally don't rip open anything other then an unarmored stomach with a waki.
==Aelryinth