Katana, Wakizashi & Tanto

[R0b0tBadgr]

This was originally going to be a question about jut the wakizashi, but now I'm curious about all 3. This is a traditional set used by samurai. The katana is of course the main weapon; the wakizashi is a smaller blade, being about half the length of the katana; and the tanto being dagger sized. My question is this:

The katana does 1d6
The wakizashi does 1d4
How much damage does a tanto do?

In PF2, daggers do 1d4 damage. They range in length from 6-18 inches (though 18 is more like a machete or short sword). The tanto is the about same size, so I would think that it would do the same damage (Wikipedia says 15-30cm; so 6-12 inches). If that is so, why does the wakizashi do 1d4? Shouldn't it - being a short sword - do 1d6? And following the logic, shouldn't the katana do 1d8 as it's effectively a longsword?

I do realize they have a *BUNCH* of cool traits, and they are "paying" for the traits with reduced dice size, but is this the only reason? Even if it is, it seems kinda silly and short-sighted IMO.

[Taja the Barbarian]

Honestly, the Wakizashi isn't getting 'cool traits' for the most part:

Compared to the classic Shortsword:
Gain: Deadly d8, Uncommon availability
Lose: Base damage 1d4 vs 1d8, Common availability
Balance: Shortsword is better when you don't crit and basically equivilent when you crit with a striking rune. Wakizashi is slightly better only when you crit without the baseline Striking rune (you either have no rune, a greater rune, or a major rune).

Compared to the classic Dagger:
Gain: Deadly d8, Uncommon availability
Lose: Thrown 10', Simple Proficiency, Common availability
Balance: The Wakizashi is a significant upgrade when it crits, but that is 'damning with faint praise' since we are now basically comparing it to 'cutlery with a somewhat inflated ego'.

Mechanically at least:
I see little reason to ever use a Wakizashi, and
I don't really see any room in the game design for an actual Tanto.

[Dubious Scholar]

Deadly d8 is +4.5 damage on crit, on average. d4>d6 is +1 damage per die, +2 on crit. Yes, the Wakizashi is slightly underpowered, since crits don't come up often. The katana has the same issue compared to the bastard sword.

The use of Fatal or a bigger Deadly die would help a bit for them, although fatal really doesn't play nice with the 2h trait.

[Vlorax]

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Honestly, the Wakizashi isn't getting 'cool traits' for the most part:

Compared to the classic Shortsword:
Gain: Deadly d8, Uncommon availability
Lose: Base damage 1d4 vs 1d8, Common availability
Balance: Shortsword is better when you don't crit and basically equivilent when you crit with a striking rune. Wakizashi is slightly better only when you crit without the baseline Striking rune (you either have no rune, a greater rune, or a major rune).

Compared to the classic Dagger:
Gain: Deadly d8, Uncommon availability
Lose: Thrown 10', Simple Proficiency, Common availability
Balance: The Wakizashi is a significant upgrade when it crits, but that is 'damning with faint praise' since we are now basically comparing it to 'cutlery with a somewhat inflated ego'.

Mechanically at least:
I see little reason to ever use a Wakizashi, and
I don't really see any room in the game design for an actual Tanto.

Yea there are a lot of traits that are kinda meh and don't really make up for the lower damage dice as far as I can tell.

Some things kinda work with them like the Assassin Archetype where you can increase the Deadly die.

[The-Magic-Sword]

Deadly is probably better for certain builds yeah, like to begin with, its more valuable on a fighter than on other martials, and even more so using accuracy saving tricks to enhance your crit rate. I'd also consider it on a flurry ranger, for instance, to really fish for those tasty crits. Assassin is another good one, for the reason you listed.

[Taja the Barbarian]

Here's the Wakizashi vs Shortsword math:

No Runes
Hit: 1d4 vs 1d6 = 1-4 vs 1-6 = 2.5 vs 3.5
Crit: 2d4+1d8 vs 2d6 = 3-16 vs. 2-12 = 9.5 vs 7
At least one in three 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which means roughly needing a 7 to hit.

Striking Rune
Hit: 2d4 vs 2d6 = 2-8 vs 2-12 = 5 vs 7
Crit: 4d4+1d8 vs 4d6 = 5-24 vs 4-24 = 14.5 vs 14
More than 4 out of 5 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which seems mathematically unlikely.

Greater Striking Rune
Hit: 3d4 vs 3d6 = 3-12 vs 3-18 = 7.5 vs 10.5
Crit: 6d4+2d8 vs 6d6 = 8-40 vs 6-36 = 24 vs 21
More than half of your 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which is mathematically unlikely (roughly needing to roll a 0 or 20 to hit).

Major Striking Rune
Hit: 4d4 vs 4d6 = 4-16 vs 4-24 = 10 vs 14
Crit: 8d4+3d8 vs 8d6 = 11-56 vs 8-48 = 33.5 vs 28
More than 2 out of 5 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, roughly needing a 1, 2, 19, or 20 to hit.

From what I can see, you really need a phenomenal crit rate for the Wakizashi to gain a actual noticeable damage advantage over the basic shortsword.

*Please note my 'necessary roll to hit' calcs were done of the top of my head and may be fundamentally flawed.

[Vlorax]

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Here's the Wakizashi vs Shortsword math:

No Runes
Hit: 1d4 vs 1d6 = 1-4 vs 1-6 = 2.5 vs 3.5
Crit: 2d4+1d8 vs 2d6 = 3-16 vs. 2-12 = 9.5 vs 7
At least one in three 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which means roughly needing a 7 to hit.

Striking Rune
Hit: 2d4 vs 2d6 = 2-8 vs 2-12 = 5 vs 7
Crit: 4d4+1d8 vs 4d6 = 5-24 vs 4-24 = 14.5 vs 14
More than 4 out of 5 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which seems mathematically unlikely.

Greater Striking Rune
Hit: 3d4 vs 3d6 = 3-12 vs 3-18 = 7.5 vs 10.5
Crit: 6d4+2d8 vs 6d6 = 8-40 vs 6-36 = 24 vs 21
More than half of your 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which is mathematically unlikely (roughly needing to roll a 0 or 20 to hit).

Major Striking Rune
Hit: 4d4 vs 4d6 = 4-16 vs 4-24 = 10 vs 14
Crit: 8d4+3d8 vs 8d6 = 11-56 vs 8-48 = 33.5 vs 28
More than 2 out of 5 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, roughly needing a 1, 2, 19, or 20 to hit.

From what I can see, you really need a phenomenal crit rate for the Wakizashi to gain a actual noticeable damage advantage over the basic shortsword.

*Please note my 'necessary roll to hit' calcs were done of the top of my head and may be fundamentally flawed.

Looks good.

using the damage comparer tool it's a pretty small difference on average but it never does more than a shortsword.

graph

[Seisho]

I really thinkg Katana and Wakizashi should have both a die size one larger and a couterpart to twin which works with those two paired

[Dubious Scholar]

Vlorax wrote:

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Here's the Wakizashi vs Shortsword math:

No Runes
Hit: 1d4 vs 1d6 = 1-4 vs 1-6 = 2.5 vs 3.5
Crit: 2d4+1d8 vs 2d6 = 3-16 vs. 2-12 = 9.5 vs 7
At least one in three 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which means roughly needing a 7 to hit.

Striking Rune
Hit: 2d4 vs 2d6 = 2-8 vs 2-12 = 5 vs 7
Crit: 4d4+1d8 vs 4d6 = 5-24 vs 4-24 = 14.5 vs 14
More than 4 out of 5 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which seems mathematically unlikely.

Greater Striking Rune
Hit: 3d4 vs 3d6 = 3-12 vs 3-18 = 7.5 vs 10.5
Crit: 6d4+2d8 vs 6d6 = 8-40 vs 6-36 = 24 vs 21
More than half of your 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, which is mathematically unlikely (roughly needing to roll a 0 or 20 to hit).

Major Striking Rune
Hit: 4d4 vs 4d6 = 4-16 vs 4-24 = 10 vs 14
Crit: 8d4+3d8 vs 8d6 = 11-56 vs 8-48 = 33.5 vs 28
More than 2 out of 5 'hits' needs to be a crit for the Wakizashi's average damage to be better, roughly needing a 1, 2, 19, or 20 to hit.

From what I can see, you really need a phenomenal crit rate for the Wakizashi to gain a actual noticeable damage advantage over the basic shortsword.

*Please note my 'necessary roll to hit' calcs were done of the top of my head and may be fundamentally flawed.

Looks good.

using the damage comparer tool it's a pretty small difference on average but it never does more than a shortsword.

graph

It looks like the divergence is entirely due to Deadly not adding another die at level 4 for a normal striking rune. Which seems right, as except for level 4, every increase adds the same EV of damage to the attack as at level 1.

So I'd suggest just changing the wording of Deadly to "add a die for each weapon die".

Edit: Although that graph doesn't show the EV change for different attack mod vs AC gaps, which obviously matters here (somewhat, since for the duration of level 4-10 with a regular striking rune, the wakizashi crits for only .5 damage more on average)

[Arklore]

I am good with it as it is. Perhaps if we see a Ninja or a Samurai Class perhaps they will get a feat equivalent to the Cleric's Deadly Simplicity with a one die upgrade for the Katana and Wakizashi.

Being a bit of a living ancient and medieval living historian there is a lot of new research that compares medieval and ancient swords (Roman and Celtic) to the Katana and Wakizashi. A lot of this experiments can be found on You Tube and other places. You can make your own conclusions, but the weapons were designed for different intended use and enemies.

[Squiggit]

It is weird that Deadly's scaling misses a step, kinda makes the trait especially bad around the time you unlock striking runes.

But the tldr seems to be that Deadly d8 is an underpowered trait. You drop a die size to pick up an extra trait, but you need to crit a quarter of the time for that to even out, even if you didn't have that scaling dip at 4.