Kikko armor and Four-mirror armor seem like pretty good bargain buys. Too good, in fact. What's going on here?
Well, you're right that they're both technically overpowered since the +5 medium AC armor from the CRB is 50 gp.
But not all eastern armor will be available, I'd guess.
It's a bit of power creep, really. They're very, very good at low levels because of the price.
I'm actually pretty alright with Kikko though; it's a nice toy for low level characters with high Dex and medium armor proficiency.
Four-mirror pretty much has to be replaced, though. It's just inferior to breastplates, and it's heavier than both breastplates and chainmail, which kinda sucks if you don't have a solution to carrying capacity.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kikko Armor is just 20 gp cheaper than Scale Mail, which also is a +5.
Honestly it's really only interesting at level 1, when you actually are limited by money. After that 50 gp more or less won't make the decission for you, and you'll most likely get the best armor in the category you can wear.
Which in case of medium armor is usually the Breastplate.
Four Mirror armor does seem a bit cheap, but only a +2 Dex and a -5 ACP, so some people might get scared by that and pick Kikko or Scale Mail over it instead.
After that you'll not be using it instead of the Breastplate again. Less Dex, more ACP and most importantly more weight, which will become a factor later.
So I really don't see either that as a huge problem.
More that there's still usually a "best" armor in each segment, and selecting anything else usually means sacrificing some kind of mechanical benefit for RP reasons.
it's asian. the power creep balances out with the katanas.
asian commoners get free exotic weapon proficiencies too, just like samurai/ninjas. (why? come on, you know why)
seriously, i am disappointed with the equipment bloat in UC.
there's no reason you can't use core equipment for asians. paizo used to do so before UC.
stuff like lamellar is exactly what many asian warriors used in history.
People should be much angrier about the haramaki I suppose.
Can't we be angry about both? :D
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I Don' t mind it. And personally I like more options.
As for Katanas being too good, they just come off as bigger, exotic Scimitars to me. Which is a nice change from 3.5' s just being a re- skinned Bastard Sword.
And then we Mithril the Kikko Armor
Who cares about proficiency? I don't.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather have more reskinning and less brand new items with completely new mechanics or readjusted stats. For example, I was really glad they didn't make an asian bow with different stats than the longbow. I would be perfectly fine with the core weapons and armour list and a bunch of conversions: a falcata has the stats of a battleaxe, a katana has the stats of a bastard sword, a wakizashi has the stats of a shortsword but is a slashing weapon. That would be FINE.
no, if we don't have profusion of new mechanical options, allowing more min-maxing for those who want to sift thru MORE stats and mix/match the best for maximum effect, then role-playing is impeded. asian geared warriors should have better stats than equal Cr'd warriors. if they don't, the roleplaying immersion is broken. all the other cultures use the same gear stats, but they aren't (pseudo)asian, that's the difference.
Some people just need something to complain about. No help for it.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You all asked for this.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.
|
|
I think they should improve a katana's critical range, because 18-20 just isn't enough for my immersion. I was under the impression that if you touched someone with the blade of katana, you would behead them. I think all katanas should automatically have the vorpal quality, but that it should activate on a 5-20.
Kikko armour is slightly better than scale mail, and four-mirror armour is very inexpensive. However, both are still inferior to a breastplate, so I don't see a big issue. People should be much angrier about the haramaki I suppose.
Not quite, both equal out to the same AC with +5 mithril with a Dex of at least +6. Breastplate giving +11 total with a +5 Max Dex for a total of 26 AC. Kikko gets +10 with a Max Dex of +6 for again 26 AC. Kikko has a +1 to Touch AC while Breastplate has +1 to Flat footed. Both have 0 armor check plenty if Breastplate has a Comfort enchant. So for a high Dex character (Dervish dancers, archery builds, etc) neither is a clear winner unless you're too cheap for a 5k enchant or you prefer higher touch of FF AC. If your Dex is only +5 than yes Breastplate wins by one point, that or the DM cock blocks all Asian gear.
Course I might of misunderstood that and you meant both Scale and Four mirror. In that case I wrote a bunch of crap for no reason and I need to go to sleep. :P
Who needs swords to kill? I use my mind...
WOW had did this jump to a fight over swords...this i clearly saw Kikko Armor in the heading lol...as much as someone agrees or fights over the stat blocks of weapons they WILL NOT CHANGE unless you write up your own system...and secondly GM a game and make that your ruling for god's sake...you are fighting over someone else's opinion on a ruling that they themselves made up and put in a book...i mean its laughable...and if you're not the GM...then talk to your GM abt it and see if he would run with it be a bit more powerful
Seranov:
A katana is a slashing weapon instead of a chopping weapon that you find in european medieval weapons (pre-gun). A katana has a VERY hard time getting thru armor which is why the tetsubo? (the big wooden stick with steel studs..sorry 2am is not good time for brain)and other weapons were designed. As for not conquering japan...after the shogun kicked the dutch out everyone forgot about it for a while. England and France didn't know how to get there by sea and but if they wanted to they could have conquered it easily. By the time they knew of its existence (Dutch were kicked out in late 1600s if I remember correctly) Europe was using guns. And there is a reason we do not see knights and samurai anymore because guns are a much more efficient killing instrument then swords. And in WW2 they targeted them because they were officers! Killing officers first has been an American war tactic since the Revolution war.
Also a katana is NOT as hard as a European weapon (well at least a good one). This is because the iron used to make steel in china and japan is not as hard as your find in northern africa and southern Europe. This is why the Japanese blacksmiths spent so much time to make it able to bend instead of shatter (with European blades tend to do if you hit them right...I have the scars to prove it). I myself am a blacksmith and have studied and practiced European, African, middle east, Chinese/Indian and Japanese forging techniques. Japanese are probably the best (the Spanish had very similar techniques) but their iron is inferior. Also japan has/had very little iron in comparison to europe. Most europeans weapons are designed to be able to CHOP thru chain mail, or later pierce thru Plate, which a Katana is just not able to do as it is designed to SLICE thru flesh (which it does very well as most of them could go thru two people or more and were tested on criminals).
I do agree that the katana should not just be a bastard sword but please do not give me the katana is the best weapon ever. It really is not. It is amazing at what it is designed to do (slice thru flesh, lightweight and flexible) but it is definitely not an all purpose weapon.
RAWR you beat me to it Bearded Ben...dam slow internet on phone /cry
Do I have to explain the joke?
Oh...now I feel bad for ranting. Sorry as a martial artist in both European and Asian styles and a blacksmith of the same the whole "katanas are the best weapon ever!" stuff I hear is a pet peeve. Sorry Seranov did not know about the joke and thank you bearded ben for pointing it out.
i didnt recognize it at first since i didnt actually read the whole thing...but after i went back up to read the whole thing i remembered see all of them before lol
|
A katana is a slashing weapon instead of a chopping weapon that you find in european medieval weapons (pre-gun). A katana has a VERY hard time getting thru armor which is why the tetsubo? (the big wooden stick with steel studs..sorry 2am is not good time for brain)and other weapons were designed. As for not conquering japan...after the shogun kicked the dutch out everyone forgot about it for a while. England and France didn't know how to get there by sea and but if they wanted to they could have conquered it easily. By the time they knew of its existence (Dutch were kicked out in late 1600s if I remember correctly) Europe was using guns. And there is a reason we do not see knights and samurai anymore because guns are a much more efficient killing instrument then swords. And in WW2 they targeted them because they were officers! Killing officers first has been an American war tactic since the Revolution war.Also a katana is NOT as hard as a European weapon (well at least a good one). This is because the iron used to make steel in china and japan is not as hard as your find in northern africa and southern Europe. This is why the Japanese blacksmiths spent so much time to make it able to bend instead of shatter (with European blades tend to do if you hit them right...I have the scars to prove it). I myself am a blacksmith and have studied and practiced European, African, middle east, Chinese/Indian and Japanese forging techniques. Japanese are probably the best (the Spanish had very similar techniques) but their iron is inferior. Also japan has/had very little iron in comparison to europe. Most europeans weapons are designed to be able to CHOP thru chain mail, or later pierce thru Plate, which a Katana is just not able to do as it is designed to SLICE thru flesh (which it does very well as most of them could go thru two people or more and were tested on criminals).
Okay...a couple of things...
If a sword shattered on you...I don't care what kind of sword it was...it was MADE WRONG. No seriously. Any sword that is made properly does not shatter. It can get a stress fracture and crack in half...but shatter? No. And even then, that should be rare...and after much usage (or abuse) that such things happen. In fact you'd pretty much HAVE to abuse the sword to cause this to happen in a even semi regular basis...which means YOUR doing it very VERY WRONG.
Spanish iron source was superior to Japanese iron (honestly it would have been hard to find worse). In fact Japan is rather notorious in Asian history as having piss poor iron and always importing a lot of it from what is now Korea. The Spanish technique was actually MUCH more sophisticated (they could differentially harden two edges at once). Course neither of these really compares to true Damascus steel which somehow managed to get carbide formation in the steel edge in many cases. But basically, until a culture has a source of consistent steel, there was folding of steel. When a culture had piss poor iron and it could not be blast furnaced into steel, they used crucible steel techniques. The end result was all the same tho...it was to make usable steel...and every culture has had mastery of whatever technique they used to make the steel AND the sword. There are plenty of historical western swords made with steel and techniques that rival the Japanese swords. There is no cultural superior technique...just individually superior craftsmen who could be from ANY culture.
And you say you study European martial arts and make claims like the European swords were chopping weapons?!? Seriously? I know you don't study any ACTUAL historical texts if you think that is the case. What the hell do you study? Or are you one of those SCA folks who think that SCA combat is historically accurate...or worse those foam sword LARP groups (not that I have anything against either...I do both SCA and LARP myself...just the whole it's how you use a real sword that makes me laugh).
omg i gotta stop reading these while driving...Mergy my friend I almost crashed because of that
Yeah I know it was made wrong...I am the one who made it (one of my first ones). Made sure to test my new stuff more and in better protective gear so live and learn and all that.
I agree with most of your second parragrah. There are some definite differences in forging techniques once you go far enough back (most eventually as you said, reached the same conclusions).
I have studies a variety of combat styles from Spain,France and Germany (well the region we now know as germany) but I was more refering to the Frank and early souther germanic (austria region) of weapons since the katana forging technique was developed VERY early in japanese history (sadly for them they got it right early and never decided to improve and the reason that the dutch and then americans with guns beat the hell out of them). I did SCA for a while but the whole "serving dish" strikes were always weird for me.
Yeah I had gotten it....was trying to go for the dignified aproach...
"You have the manners of a goat. And you smell like a dung-heap! And you have no knowledge whatsoever of your potential!"
I have the sudden desire to go listen to Queen... must grade papers... arghhh! Not even a band I like... that's what I get for dropping in on a thread....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who needs swords to kill? I use my mind...
Like this?
See, bigger exotic scimitar as in 1d8, 18-20x2 would have been perfectly fine. But no, they had to add in deadly. Yeah not a big thing...but still annoying.
Eh, CdGs are already pretty deadly, so its not terribly unbalanced, and I like the flavor of it personally.
Katanas were also used for assisting in Seppuku(your 2nd would behead you if you failed to kill yourself with the Tanto/Wakazashi), it makes sense that you'd use a weapon with that kind of potential to finish the job. Just sorta makes sense to me.
My fighting characters buy kikko armor all the time. I call it brigandine armor to give it a more European feel, and call it a day. No problems yet.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
*shrug* I like curved blades IRL, and I like to play light fast characters (since IRL I'm a heavy slow character) Scimitar/katana/falchion fit for my curved blade needs (and have a logical progression). Right now I'm liking the Aldori dueling sword because it fits my love of curved weapons and is finessable. It's also fairly easy to 'fluff' as a katana.
That and Dervish Dance annoys me because it seems to be a 'go to' feat for finess fighters.
Edit: RD is right about the original topic though, the armor is ok. Refluff as needed
|
|
I have studies a variety of combat styles from Spain,France and Germany (well the region we now know as germany) but I was more refering to the Frank and early souther germanic (austria region) of weapons since the katana forging technique was developed VERY early in japanese history (sadly for them they got it right early and never decided to improve and the reason that the dutch and then americans with guns beat the hell out of them). I did SCA for a while but the whole "serving dish" strikes were always weird for me.
How did your fight group come to the conclusion that swords are chopping weapons?!? I mean really. NO existing sword manual says that about swords. When using a sword on cutting medium, chopping is pretty none effective vs actually slashing or stabbing with the sword. Armored or not. So was there a better reason for the conclusion that you chop with swords other then you guys didn't bother to actually research actual swords and just kinda made something up?