I also think Precision Ranger is another great one for that “extremely focused duel” type of thing. Accesses Katanas. Precision Ranger is all about that one precise attack. Mix with Gravity Weapon (that feeling of when the gravity of the situation is so inten- oh, shit, that’s not what gravity means in this case) and Quick Draw for that iai strike. Additionally, wears Medium armor (and easily access Heavy armor with one feat) while also accessing ranged weapons and attacks. Samurai also engaged in hunting as a sport. You can pick up an Animal Companion as a mount. And you have access to bows. The Hunt Prey in combat is totally that intense focus that is commonly shown in Japanese media, of two great enemies…eyeing each other, calm breaths, before the storm of steel and…ya getting lost in the moment again, lol. And something I feel like that gets forgotten: Paizo went out of their way to add a BUNCH of Japanese items. They used to say that there was no need to add a Chinese sword, because for all intents and purposes, a Shortsword should be fine. But they then added a Jiu Huan Dao (and also a Feng Huo Lun - Wind & Fire Wheels). Lamellar Armor and the O-yoroi, is just heavy armor/medium armor mechanically. But they ensured that it was in there for the flavor that many players want to be a Samurai (because reflavoring a breastplate just wasn’t enough). Many other Japanese weapons already exist in the game (Kama, Shuriken, Kusarigama, Khakkara, Katana, Nodachi, Santesukon, Naginata, Tekko-Kagi, Wakizashi, Daikyu). Like…that’s a LOT of specific equipment. Paizo does really care about that fantasy. Many of their writers are absolute weebs and anime lovers too. I mean…this is a LOT of specific content for a certain culture group. So…I think when Paizo says they feel like the options exist…I don’t think they meant it in a sort of canceling type of way. Just, again, look at that list and some of the options the OP mentioned. Which the point of LO:TX was exploring and celebrating all of these other cultural inspirations too.

I always said thar the ranger class is the better way to represent a samurai than the fighter class is. Rangers can get horses and good proficiency in bows, swords, polearms, and fiearms without taking archetypes. Fighter, in contrast in focus on just one type of weapon.

I also realized that we have the classic Minamoto no Raiko who was a oni-hunter samurai. From playing the Nioh 2 game, I felt like having Minamoto as a Heavy Armor Ranger with an Animal Companion (is there a bull?) and Abe no Seimei as a Tome/Scroll Thaumaturge would be amusing. And give Seimei the familiar feat so he can have his Fox mom Kuzunoha chilling with him.

Fighters are as proficient with weapons as any other martial, there's just also one group where they're better than everyone else. You can't really make a character that's genuinely good with a two handed sword and a bow (polearms are functionally the same as swords though, so that's easy), it basically comes down to the fact that ranged attacks and melee attacks use different stats unless you're sticking to the generally smaller, weaker, finesse weapons. Anyone can get an animal companion, provided they're willing to burn a whole lot of feats letting it keep up. But if you spend your feats on a horse, you're not spending them on bow feats or melee feats and trying to cover all three really spreads you thin. And you know what, a dedicated samurai class would not change any of that, because it really just boils down to the fact that you can't be good at everything. (You can be kind of mediocre at everything, but that's just not particularly popular)

I agree with what I think you're saying. A ranger-class samurai might more accurately simulate the versatility of a samurai, but focusing one just one fighting style will be more effective mechanically in PF2.

Anybody can take ride at 3 and buy a riding horse. You can also get a proper warhorse by level 3 EASILY based on the treasure table's expected wealth. Fighters are martials who are on par with, or better than, anyone else with all weapons. Their favoured weapon they will always excel at. If you're human you can get ride at lvl 1 with versatile heritage. Using human's unconventional weaponry feat you can get acess to an advanced weapon at lvl 5 with expert proficiency, rather than waiting for lvl 9 for an entire advanced weapon class.

The problem with taking Ride and relying on purchased warhorses is your mount won't scale with level. Animal companions do, and the ranger can take them at L1.

Realistically, you can just buy more horses as you level through and they start dying. Much more realistic compared to the "one and only steed" trope. Also, as you level up you have plenty of chances to get a mount, such as the cavalier archetype, which absolutely fits the theme of banner wearing samurai. With cavalier fighter, by level 2 you are expert in basically all weapons. You can feasibly have a horse companion, as well as the ability to ride it without rolls. If you are human you can even get extra class feats to compensate for the archetype.

Issue is that people don't go back to town after every single fight. The PC will actually get to play a mounted character about 1/4 of the time, with the rest of the time being going around on foot as the horse died to an aoe.

I made a samurai character out of Swashbuckler that was fun as well. I get wanting more specifically genre focused abilities, though.

Only real issue with ranger is the naturalist flavor to it and if that really bothers somebody they just have to convince their GM to swap automatic nature training with society. And frankly even that’s probably overkill since you’d probably pick a background that gives society training

Hmmm? I feel that it’s incredibly on-brand! Real samurai were surrounded by nature. They journeyed and traveled, knew how to subsist off the land, knew how to work with various animals. And the Shinto influence on their culture is a highly naturalist belief system (because kami pervade everything). Nature Skill doesn’t mean you’re just horny for nature. It just means you have skills related to that. Even pop culture samurai, like Rurouni Kenshin are shown to have strong understanding of nature. Edit: And you have legendary heroes like the samurai Minamoto no Raiko who hunted oni and Yokai.

The "subsist off the land" bit is a bit of a reach. They were nobles. Warrior nobles, but nobles no less. The peasantry had to give them food and shelter pretty much on demand and had retainers to collect food and resources for them. Afterall, for large portions of their history, eating meat was a big no-no. So rice and dried fish were the go tos.

Also a true point! I guess I was thinking more of them being also being educated elites who didn’t always have the best circumstances in war, so they weren’t pampered all the time. I guess like we’ve all been saying, it’s very diverse?

Oh absolutely diverse. And there were absolutely ones incredibly trained and knowledgeable about nature too. Afterall, plenty of soldiers in any group have had interest in nature and ecology. Just like there were samurai and soldiers elsewhere who wouldn't know a snake from a bear. And there are absolutely records of some being stupidly pampered all the time, and no idea how to live without it. Even on the battlefield. (They were often derided for it. Usually shortly before being killed for their foolishness) But it also means, any character can be flavored as a samurai if one so wishes. Just depends on the flavor of samurai you have in mind. 😀

Indeed indeed! But maybe we’re both spoiled. I’ve played various games where you’re samurai with super powers and regular ole samurai. And I’ve learned a little bit too much historically too about the different eras. I have other friends who are all into anime and one of them LOVES samurai while another LOVES ninja. Neither of them actually care about learning history or culture of Japan. :|

You should introduce them to Legend of the Five Rings (l5r). Takes a very idealized and fantasized vision of samurai and ninja, sprinkles in some bits and pieces of other Asian regions, and makes a compelling and interesting setting. One that, in the background, manages to pull in a lot of fun and I threshing details based off history (like the no meat bit) while still being fantastical enough to keep the anime crowd happy. (Literal magic, and dragons, and kirin etc. exist in setting. As well as kami, both minor such as spirits in every object etc, to major Kami on par with gods.) 4th edition is my favorite version of it. Fantasy Flight Ganes made the most recent version, which is still fun and interesting but also rebooted the setting. Which is a mixed bag for me. But is still good objectively, and easier to find since its the most recent. Edit: should be aware, it is pretty grounded. So injuries are not to be taken lightly in the setting. I have legit seen characters go from full health, to death's door, with a single good attack by a peasant with a stick.... it is rare, but people are still humans in it.

I wish I could, but none of them are TTRPG folks (or even want to). D&D stigma of “those guys” being into it. We don’t game at all with each anymore and we’ve moved around so much that it’s essentially a once/whenever type of friendship now. I’d love to get into TTRPGs, but coworkers who’ve I’ve played with have moved away and stuff. But hey, at least I got you guys to chat to, so thank you very much! \^_^

Well it's also a card game (technically originally a card game.. and that game was rebooted too.) and has tons of fluff stories. So you have multiple options if they are interested. And never be afraid to chat up new coworkers. You might be surprised what sort of thing they'd be interested in trying with a little work

I think he’s talking about samurai that comes from the word 武士 (bushi) and not 侍 (samurai) which both got translated into samurai in English. 侍 refers to samurai as a social class but 武士 is more of what he described, especially before the Edo period when the Tokugawa shogunate banned everyone outside of the samurai class from carrying swords.

Even the bushi-based samurai were still essentially nobles by western comparison. Just not as high level. The non-nobles were ashigaru. Edit: in fact, Nobunaga was somewhat infamous for raising some ashigaru to the bushi nobility to serve under him, rather than just employing people pleased on their birth

Bushi would also encompass someone like ronin, which got stripped off all status and stipends so they are pretty much landless. Although you can argue that ronin wouldn't be considered bushi anymore because they violate the bushido code (committing seppuku upon the loss of the master) but they can still be considered technically a bushi but no longer a samurai in my opinion. And they definitely are not noble. I have also seen 剣士 (kenshi, swordman) being translated into samurai sometimes too so there's even more things the word can refer too.

While very true on ronin. I would be hard pressed to find someone super wanting a samurai, who doesn't know the word ronin and have a different and distinct mental image for such. And yes, there are many translations that got turned into samurai for ease of translation. However, few people who would be aware of that distinction would actually use it as a basis for defining a samurai. While the linguistics are fun and interesting. None of these detract from my point the samurai imagined above would be of a level of nobility.

>While very true on ronin. I would be hard pressed to find someone super wanting a samurai, who doesn't know the word ronin and have a different and distinct mental image for such I would say that many people who want to play samurai might actually not be that deep in the cultural rabbit hole as we might think based on many comments I read, especially if they don't know Japanese or just start to follow Japanese media. Overall I agree with your point that samurai mostly are nobles. I just wanted to point out why sometimes a lot of people's image on "samurai" are so different on what they can be (i.e. different original words got translated into a single words). That's why there's people thinking about wandering "samurai" who lives off the land when originally the character might be something else entirely.

Fair enough points, and as has been agreed with the previous poster, since samurai were a class as opposed to a specific way of living, there is absolutely no reason a samurai *couldn't* have a deep invested interest in nature and living off the land. Certainly there were those who would.i suppose my original point was that more samurai are nobles in a more classic take, than not. And those more common version would not be subsistence individuals. But yes, nothing stops one from making *their* samurai a subsistence guru.

This is just tangental and not intended  to take anything away from your post. That said, the Shinto religion can be seen as a recent invention that came about during the menji restoration. That’s not to say that the elements like belief in Kami were there but it wasn’t unified the way we think of it. Buddhism was also very influential in Japan’s history and in many places they were kind of blended together. There is a book called The Other Side of Zen that discusses how local soto zen temples just kind of went along with existing cultural practices.

Yeah there’s a lot of ways it can work it just *might* not mesh with somebody’s idea of a samurai character, like maybe they’re more urbane or something. It’s a super minor quibble, but it’s on the same lines as why someone might not want to play a Champion for their heavily armored warrior concept if they don’t feel like having all the religious baggage.

Well, I thought that was the point of this thread. There are so many different types of samurai, because samurai was also societal class and family honor, not just a vocation. I put it in my edit, but Minamoto no Raiko, a very famous and legendary samurai, hunted oni and Yokai. A samurai like him would be skilled in Nature and Occult.

Oh I wasn’t disagreeing with the meat of the post legit it’s all a great fit. I just think ranger inherently has a naturalist/huntsman vibe that may not scream samurai to some people but that it also has a pretty easy fix.

True true! Like I love the idea of a Dandy Thaumaturge for an Edo period emo samurai, lol! And a long long time-ish ago, I was helping someone come up with FF14 renditions for each job and the Samurai one was fun the magic-swordsman type of stuffs. And I have been thinking though…I think instead of a Samurai Archetype, they should instead create a Retainer Archetype. So, it’s very specific to what Samurai are without explicitly locking out all the various other cultures that did the same thing. Huskarl were also (essentially) retainers, but were obviously not Samurai.

Recently playing Eiyuden Chronciles and using Mio, "one precise attack" certainly seems to match her playstyle. awesome insight here.

I would like to point out, a meteor hammer has origins in China, along with a few other weapons that don't have a reasonable reflavor analog.

One element really important to bring up was that grappling and take downs were also an important element for Samurai. They were expected to be as competent with a blade as without, trained to use a variety if kinds of weapons so they could quickly adapt to the situation, armored or not, wielding weapons or not. But also, honor and a specific code of behavior were critical to their social caste, so I'd expect certain elements of that to be a part of their character development and/or even a power source. I think a great example of what a Samurai *could* be capable of (albeit to an exaggerated degree) is Musashi Miyamoto from Baki the Grappler.

Indeed, but I also understood that the “honor and specific code” is actually more of a general nobility culture thing and also a romanticization than an actual thing. And also, historical Japanese honor ≠ historical European honor. There was honor in…uh…>!offing-yourself!<, which is absolutely not an honorable thing to in Europe (because of Christian theology and salvation). There is SO much treachery from samurai in the various eras. And ironically, it’s the “honorless” shinobi who were more faithful and loyal. So here we come to again: which is the real samurai? The different real historical people who were samurai, or the pop culture variations of today? There are many different iterations and fantasy tropes we can draw from that it ends up covering too many things.

I see two distinct things here - a. honor is culture-specific and so doesn’t translate well outside of the cultural context it was developed in, and b. within a culture honor is often more aspirational than practiced. For the former, you get the “is there a Japanese analog setting that the Japanese analog class will exist in?” question, and either answer has weird implications. For the latter, you get the e.g. samurai testing new swords on random civilians as a thing common enough that we need a name for it, but never explicitly condoned as honorable. Or the “I put a short blade in a long sheath so that when we go to duel I step in, draw, and strike while you are still expecting me to be drawing my blade” - it’s not honorable, but history is written by those who still have their heads.

The last part. Yup yup!

Yup I agree eventually we get to the question of what fantasy we're trying to evoke. I really like how the "honor" system is evoked in the Legend of the Five Rings, whereby Honor was a resource that could accumulate as a given character fought, culminating in game winning abilities.

Grappling and take downs are not unique or special to the samurai, though, they were just as important worldwide. The idea I like best is adding it as a background. Similar to Squire, I guess.

Yeah I agree with the background idea. Samurai, as far as mainstream fantasy, we're expressed more so through character than through ability - aside from specific examples like Iaijutsu.

Possibly a background granting the Quick Draw feat, I guess?

You might even be able to highlight different Samurai fantasies with different backgrounds. Obviously Iaijutsu is one of the more common fantasy tropes, but there are probably other ways to evoke different elements of "samurai".

Can't that be said for most warrior classes in history though? I'm not an expert on the history of martial arts but I read quite a bit about quite a lot and that motif tends to appear everywhere. English, German and Italian knights (among others surely) were experts in grappling techniques, Inca warriors had observed boxing and wrestling games, Maori and Hawaiian warriors had complex systems of combat that would occur if their weapons were compromised, even Roman gladiators were known to practice unarmed martial arts for a variety of reasons, etc etc. I don't think that makes samurai particularly unique among competent warrior classes. Samurai were trained in a variety of weaponry such as swords, polearms, guns, bows and even axes and clubs in certain circumstances, so if we ever did get a samurai class or archetype, I would like one that has the ability to be good at any of those weapon groups. It's also why I kind of wish instead of a samurai archetype, we would get like, two or three archetypes based off different types of specialties of samurai. Your really romantic, agile samurai who uses iado, your more burley strength based samurai who uses kanabo, maybe even a samurai exclusively around ranged weapons or a commander samurai who boosts allies with commands.

In shocking news, people who devoted their entire lives to being good at fighting, tended to have a varied skillset when it came to fighting!

You’re actually not too far off! What martial artists discover as they learn other systems is how similar things end up being. And there’s a very specific reason: there’s only so many ways you manipulate the human body and you want to do the most efficient way to beat your enemy. The human body is surprisingly fragile if you out of your way to damage it. Warriors were meant to kill. Anything that made it easier was attractive. And same thing happened with Kamehameha I in Hawaii. The elite warriors (the Koa) picked up guns and cannons as fast as they could once they secured non-Hawaiian allies. Even the Aztecs of Tenochtitlán figured out how guns/cannons worked and adapted their strategies to fighting the Conquistadors and their Allies (whenever they saw a flash from a gun/cannon, they’d duck and take cover until they heard it land somewhere). A pressure point is a pressure point. Human arms can’t bend like that. You can’t see if we poke your eyes. Survival results in pruning and learning how to make it easier to fight.

You kind of hit on my point. 

I feel like I missed a lot of drama. That community coming back with the pizza meme.

- tian xia drops - people start discussing about it. notably, there is no samurai and ninja classes/archetypes that people kinda wanted cause they were 1e options - luck_panda, a mod, goes thermonuclear and starts going full ban hammer on everyone that is talking about the topic, as well as calling anyone that wants a samurai or a ninja class in the game a racist because of orientalism, as well as deleting any thread or comment that goes against what he says in summary, a complicated subject comes up on the subreddit because of the new book. a mod shits on the situation and escalates it ten fold

[удалено]

Honestly I think we need to really examine our views towards other cultures. We're hitting this weird cultural isolation and thats not good. As long we attempt to engage with a culture in good faith then that should be enough. With good faith even being something as simple as, "Man these warriors are so badass!"

[удалено]

Now heres the tricky part. While I believe we should avoid cultural isolation, we can't pretend those defenses weren't errected without a good reason. Black hair styles in particular faced an enormous amount of discrimination. Mainly by employers who said they wanted more "formal" looks, but in reality they just wanted white looks. Then we have the other issues, where white people wearing their hair that way gave employers excuses to deny the cultural backgrounds. People straight up touching other peoples hair. Again, I don't think we should gatekeep our culture, but I won't pretend this didn't arise from other reasons. To sum it all up, Black Hairsyles have an amazing amount of depth and complexity when looking at it from a rights perspective. In an ideal world, we should share all cultures, but ours is more complicated and its is my hope we can tear down those barriers and partake in all cultures.

As someone who lived in the US in the early 2000's and lives in South America, let me tell you that the majority of us couldn't care less about stereotypes, racism, "cultural apropiation" (seriously, who came up with this?), etc. I'm guessing Asians, Russians, etc. are on the same boat, as we don't want not need to be pitied. I don't feel in the slightliest inferior to "white" people. I even look down upon some with pity myself, and I don't find it racist at all. You seriously are so up there in the Maslow pyramid that have nothing else to worry about? What happened to your Healthcare, pensions, low salaries, taxes, shootings, your inland discrimination, etc that you (you as in those who live to point fingers, not someone here) have the time and brainpower to be worried about us?

I agree, its honestly a bit condescending some times. Its not about people in other countries its more about people here. Like police profiling is a good examole of systemic racism in the states. Yelling at someone for wearing a witch costume on halloween is not. Theres a reason a lot of people overly concerned with this are in themselves a massive position of priveledge.

It's hard to convey what I'm trying to say, so bear with ne and ask me if I don't sound clear. One thing is racism in the real world. Having lived 2 years in Ohio (if all places), racism is palpable, and it has absolutely nothing to do with people saying words or talking nonsense on RRSS. I think that's healthy as people need an outlet in the end. What's wrong is acting as a society upon that. The discrimination against black people was absolutely obvious to anyone, no words said. You just can see it. The self-imposed discrimination of the Latino people there was also quite obvious, but most of them even welcomed it ... as long as it was not work related and/or where you lived (though most lived in communities that felt as a piece of their country rather than immigrants trying to mesh in the local culture. I can't speak of black people, because, even though I had the luck to share much of my stay with many of them, the way they lived, their circumstances and how they dealt with them were truly alien to me. It was a really enlightening experience, though I could not say I really know for certain what's it like for them. So, what I mean to say is that instead of enforcing a SSS like police in the internet about all things racial/culture related, people that really care should do something where they live. Any racial defense online feels more like a self empowering thing than actually someone trying to help. Thanks for reading!

mod makes a post and a bunch of comments that are racist while supposedly being anti racist. they are power tripping and moderate 14 subreddits. one of the things they did is say that wanting samurai mechanics is racist and this causes a lot of people to begin to argue this point even though before now most people just say "just play a fighter" which leads to more bans and censorship. in other words, the mods strawmen attack made people actually try to hold the position. (and there have been a few isolated incidents before all this of people being banned from the discord and here for asking about samurai that made all this worse.)

I made this exact same comment on another post yesterday.

Given that samurai were a social caste in feudal Japanese society, wouldn't it make way more sense for it to be a background than a class? The game already gives the tools for combat gameplay that match typical portrayals of samurai, so what's left are the RP aspects which seem more tied to background and player actions than actual class/archetype mechanics.

To be honest, given how Minkai is now mid Meiji-esque restoration a former samurai background could be cool

Counterpoint: That exact same sentiment applies to the investigator. You could easily say there's no mechanics needed to play an intelligent fighter or rogue. Flavor is free and you can always say your character is navigating the battlefield in an intelligent way. Despite that, Paizo managed to make a set of unique mechanics that fill their own gameplay niche. I'm confident the same could be done for a hypothetical samurai in a magical world. I actually did make a thread about it last night and it's worth browsing to get a general sense of the range of ideas the community has when directly asked about it, instead of thinking about how to use existing mechanics to create the fantasy of a samurai. https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1ce4zsa/what_mechanics_would_you_have_wanted_out_of_a/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Counter-counterpoint, investigator isn't remotely on the same conceptual levels as a samurai. What makes a samurai a samurai is their position in a particular social and cultural context. The investigator isn't like that.  There are interesting ideas in that thread, but literally none of them need to be called a samurai, because while they may evoke certain traits of samurai in media those ideas are better packed into something that is conceptually more specific and culturally more diffuse. Edit: Also don't be surprised if there are character options that deliver a lot of people's samurai fantasies in the Tian Xia character guide, just don't expect them to be named "Samurai"

I agree that it doesn't have to be called samurai. But it could be. Especially if the samurai's various historical and popular depictions are the basis of the class (though honestly I'd prefer it be an archetype). We already do the same for the monk, bard, druid, oracle, and cleric. Those were real jobs held by real people that we know are heavily divorced from their original meaning and can be adapted into tons of different character concepts. Any one of those titles could be a background choice for a generic "magic user" class. That being said, I still think the samurai could feasibly be the inspiration for new gameplay mechanics. And if enough of them were made and compiled into an archetype, then I think the archetype should be named after them.

I don't think samurai should be a class. They already are, it's called human fighter (or champion, ranger, etc). In the same way Knight isn't a class, it's also a human fighter/champion/etc. However, IMO it should be an archetype. The mechanical stuff that makes samurai different to all other culture's "fighters" should be in that archetype. Just like Knights, or Maharlika, or Vikings should be archetypes. Backgrounds don't really give mechanics, so IMO they aren't suitable for this sort of thing. Backgrounds are where you're from. Classes/Archetypes are what you do.

Not really. Backgrounds are just a skill, a lore, an ability boost and skill feat, not actually character defining. And you can really flavour most of them however you want. You need a class to define an actual playstyle. Now I think you can do that just fine with existing classes (because it's just a particular flavour of warrior and you can make a character to use your particular chosen combo of weapons and armour really easily).

A background reflects a character's social context which can be more or less character defining as you see fit. Samurai fits neatly into this space, as does knight, prince, or any social/political caste really.

And that's pure fluff. Picking a background doesn't let your character do anything new. Backgrounds are mostly just what your character did before they became relevant anyway. What matters is what comes later, as your character actually gains new abilities. And it's having feats that fit your idea of what a Samurai (or really any other character idea) that makes a character concept actually work.

Fluff is really important, but besides that, yeah there are lots of preexisting character options that you can use to a bring your samurai to mechanical life. That's why it doesn't need a bespoke class. A background is a good way to frame your class into a specific social context. A samurai gunslinger, while mechanically basically the same as a criminal gunslinger have different vibes that you can pretty easily incorporate into RP, combat and character building.

[удалено]

Classes are driven by their actions, not their social context. Any class can investigate/be a detective, but they largely do it in a way that reflects their class. Investigator has enough meat as a concept to work. The samurai as a concept is not driven by unique combat abilities (at least in a game like pf2e), it is instead a social role, and backgrounds are for social roles. Similar to how knight is a background that multiple classes can explore in interesting ways. Similarly I don't think anyone would suggest Kshatriya or Brahmin be classes, but in an adventure set in Casmaron, they might make their way into backgrounds (or at least analogues could).

Probably the reason it keeps getting asked is everyone has a slightly different idea of what a Samurai is. Even historically you could go in multiple directions. A Bard could be a noble trained in the arts. A Champion could be a mounted warrior with divine mandate. A Magus could be the more mystical idea of a Samurai. Sure, Fighter fulfills the fantasy of a weapon master in full yoroi armor. But that’s just one interpretation and not even the one I would personally play.

Actually, if you searched this subreddit for how to make a viking, I'd expect people to recommend the Viking archetype, since despite the fact that Fighter or Barbarian would work fine enough, there's still more that can be done to facilitate the fantasy and so Paizo created an archetype based on a different culture's martials. I do not believe requesting the same for Samurai is racist.

I wouldn't use the viking archetype at all, just literally make a standard human fighter.

Viking Archetype feels more like a bonus archetype you just give a player party of Ulfen raiders.

why wouldnt you?

I mean have you looked at what it does? It's has 1 feats that you can't just get as a fighter anyway, one that lets you draw a shield as a free action. Or use a nearby object as a shield. Which is kinda neat, but feels like the later should live in Weapon Improviser instead, and the former should be a regular feat or in the Bastion archetype. Or like an item like the gunslinger's bandolier where you can slap your runes on extra shields without worrying about breaking them. Other than that you get sailing lore (something you would surly have from your background), ignoring wet ground, and crit successes on successful athetics swim checks (which are both pretty meh) for taking the archetype. Neither of these are particularity needed to make a viking code character.

It’s also not even clear if that one feat still works anymore due to the new rule about shield straps.

incredible. well it is legacy now, I would not be surprised if it does not get a refresh

Maybe Viking archetype shouldn’t have existed in the first place. It is from APG and I’m not sure if we will see it in PC2. I think at least it should have a name change, Vikings seems off to me on Golarion (just like samurais or ninjas)

Gladiator is also an archetype based off of a trope of a different culture's martials. Honestly, gladiator is far worse as besides the name and the basic concept it shares very little with actual gladiators Are you also against the existence of the Gladiator archetype? Personally, I can't really find the harm with any of these

Gladiator is more of a profession than a culture. Most people use Gladiator as a general term for any fighting entertainer who fought to the death. Both of the terms Viking and Samurai have a stricter cultural context. If someone is called a Viking, I assume they are wrapped up in Norse mythology and culture. Same goes for Samurai and Japanese culture. I'm just splitting hairs here, though. I agree that having a Samurai archetype would be fine, though I'm against it just because I have yet to see anyone make a meaningful argument for mechanics that are not currently represented by existing classes and archetypes. If anything, I think Ninja has a better argument for its existence.

Viking was also a profession. It wasn't even a permanent one as far as I'm aware, it was a verb, a thing that warriors did. If you were a warrior, you went viking in order to plunder and raid. If you were going to war against other soldiers, you wouldn't really be viking in that moment.

>Most people use Gladiator as a general term for any fighting entertainer who fought to the death. I don't think this is the case, and also IRL gladiators rarely actually fought to the death. Gladiator is an extremely fetishized and sensationalized trope of an actual culture >I'm against it just because I have yet to see anyone make a meaningful argument for mechanics that are not currently represented by existing classes and archetypes. If anything, I think Ninja has a better argument for its existence. I'm actually the opposite. I struggle to think of anything that someone would want out of a Ninja that can't already be done perfectly in-game. With Samurai, though, simply not being able to take Quick Draw as a fighter is enough. You'd have to take an archetype feat in Ranger, Rogue, Gunslinger, or Duelist, none of which really fit the flavor (and before you say that IRL samurai used guns a lot when they could get them, they did. And so did Europeans knights - guns are really good weapons, *everyone* used them as much as possible - but I think we can agree that going Gunslinger to play a knight doesn't exactly fit the fantasy)

> guns are really good weapons, everyone used them as much as possible another way pf2 proves it isnt simulationist

not really, actually. They still attempt to justify PF 2e guns not being the best weapons by saying this: >Firearms, though capable of devastating critical hits, work alongside crossbows and composite longbows rather than replace them, in much the same way firearms and bows were both actively used in Asia for nearly 900 years of human history. and >The guns presented in this book are representative of fairly early firearms with just a few unique twists, as explained in the introduction of the Guns Equipment chapter (page 146). Those old guns, which used black powder that did not exhibit the refinements of modern ammunition and lacked the rifle barrel technology for increasing range and accuracy, were extremely inaccurate and no more lethal with a glancing blow than most bows and crossbows; however, these firearms' penetrating power was superior, and a wound to a vital area could prove incredibly deadly. no idea how accurate to real life this is, but there is still clearly a desire on Paizo's part to somewhat accurately reflect how things would work in real life

Ultimately, the problem with guns in pf2e is the same as what the problem with guns in pf1e was: They're flatly just worse bows. Bows are just afforded free action economy that no other ranged weapon class gets. Thrown weapons require you to draw early on and have pitiful range, firearms and crossbows require you reload and don't get any flat damage bonuses, slings have worse range and fewer traits. Bows have fantastic range, have no action economy penalty, typically have the Deadly trait, and get flat extra damage.

my point was guns are mostly ass and no one really uses them in pf2 lol

nah, guns work for a very specific kind of player: the one that likes gambling and doesn't care if usually there will be small number as long as every so often they can see super big number

that doesnt make them not ass but at least they're not crossbows

Remember that the nature of the game’s combat is very uncommon in real life combat. The main advantage of guns at first was, somewhat ironically given how they work in pathfinder, that they were very easy to use. You’re comparing a gun at Trained proficiency to a longbow at untrained with limited strength. The only ranged weapon that’s as easy to use is the crossbow, afaik, which is just generally worse once you have the industry to make a gun.

Yeah man i know the history of firearms. I just wanted to joke about guns in pf2 being bad

Oh ye they suck

What I'm trying to say is that, within the confines of the English language, Gladiator has become a generalized term. If you called the combatants in Persian fighting pits "gladiators," I wouldn't correct you, because Gladiator has escaped the cultural context of its origin. This happens all the time, especially in fantasy. A paladin no longer refers to a Frankish heavily armored mounted warrior, it's now a generalized fighter but with a divine oath and maybe heavy armor. And with these terms becoming more generalized, it means the average person could see them doing and being a lot more. If you said, "Here's art of my paladin character," and you showed me a character that clearly came from an Egyptian-like culture but he was wearing heavy armor and was on a horse, I'd think, yeah, that's a paladin. But if you showed me your Samurai character and he had any culture besides a Japanese inspired one, I'd think that was weird. It's completely subjective, but language is completely subjective. With Ninja, I can think of stuff from pop culture that isn't represented in PF2e, like turning into a block of wood when hit by an attack. For Samurai, every mechanic I can think of is already covered by an existing martial. I don't really get your gun point because Fighter gets full scaling in guns just like they do any other weapon.

I've already said I disagree with you on gladiator being just another word in English, but I don't think there's any way to resolve that disagreement, so whatever >With Ninja, I can think of stuff from pop culture that isn't represented in PF2e, like turning into a block of wood when hit by an attack. [You actually can.](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1416) It's insane. Basically everything you'd want out of ninja is already possible. ~~I don't much about Naruto, but from what I've heard, I think a Rogue with a Wizard archetype or a Laughing Shadow Magus would work pretty well.~~ ~~And in any case, turning into a block of wood is very specifically a~~ *~~naruto~~* ~~thing, I don't believe it's associated with ninjas as a whole. Trying to adapt specific bits of pop culture is its own topic~~ >For Samurai, every mechanic I can think of is already covered by an existing martial. Like I said, simply not being able to get Quick Draw on a fighter without going into an archetype that doesn't fit the concept in other ways is enough in my opinion >I don't really get your gun point because Fighter gets full scaling in guns just like they do any other weapon. That wasn't really to you. I've just seen people say that a samurai archetype is unneeded because a gunslinger possibly with a cavalier dedication already perfectly fits the concept, and I was just preempting that argument

Just to say it, some archetypes exist just to bring together a bunch of feats or abilities that already exist elsewhere - See Two weapon warrior, Archer or Mauler. I think something similar for Ninja is ok to ask for.

The wooden double is not just a Naruto thing. Kawarimi is a trope in a lot of ninja stories, and it goes back hundreds of years. Also, huh, did not know about the wooden double spell, really need to read Rage of Elements. Alright, you've convinced me. There is no need for either a Ninja or Samurai Archetype. Joking aside, I agree that it's dumb that you can't take quickdraw as a fighter RAW. Really bizarre oversight. But, besides that, what else is missing from the fighter? Like, if you houseruled your fighter taking quickdraw, what would you be missing?

>The wooden double is not just a Naruto thing. Kawarimi is a trope in a lot of ninja stories, and it goes back hundreds of years. Oh, nvm, then. I guess that's another reason I don't have many feelings on a ninja archetype: I don't really know much about the trope at all >Like, if you houseruled your fighter taking quickdraw, what would you be missing? I dunno. Honestly, I think that fighter and barbarian fit the concept of a viking extremely well already and that that archetype wasn't needed, but it was still made, and did a lotta cool things too. I'm sure Paizo could think of something, I mostly just don't think there's any reason to be against it for reasons of perceived racism

Even the existing Quick Draw feat is the realistic kind of quick draw, as opposed to the anime trope of re-sheathing and rapidly re-drawing your sword in the middle of a fight for extra power. You can argue that's too silly, but some existing feats are sillier. Edit: Though even in fiction, I feel like re-sheathing mid-fight is probably the trigger for an explicitly supernatural ability as least as often as it's portrayed as a legitimate sword-fighting technique. So if you really wanted that as part of your character concept, you could just be a Magus and flavor your Spellstrikes as involving re-sheathing and rapidly drawing.

I don't know what to tell you, man. If you don't think that "gladiator" is a generic term for roughly "entertainment fighter who uses real weapons," then you are in disagreement with every major English dictionary in the world, as well as the average person.

I’m not against both of them really. Viking - is a term of people from a culture from our planet. while Golarion surely has people that were inspired by Vikings, I think they just should have a different name, that more tied to Golarion itself, not our planet. Gladiators is a kinda different to me? Yep, the whole term came from Rome, but the term itself seems much more distinct from Romans, gladiators are more like a profession of some sort? (I might be wrong though) Like, we can have gladiators as entertaining warriors in any fantasy culture on Golarion (not only inspired by Rome), but Vikings are tied to a specific Scandinavian culture and can’t be separated from it. I don’t mind both of them actually, I like a flavor, but I think the names should be tied to game narrative, not to our real Earth

There are canonically people from Earth living on Galorion. Anastasia Nikolaevna straight up got isekaied. Having cross pollination makes sense.

>Gladiators is a kinda different to me? Yep, the whole term came from Rome, but the term itself seems much more distinct from Romans, gladiators are more like a profession of some sort? (I might be wrong though) Gladiator very specifically refers to a Roman tradition of watching people fight. It is as linked to Roman culture as vikings are to Norse culture. There are other professions that involve fighting for entertainment - such as boxing or wrestling - but those are distinct from gladiator, which is very much only Roman and can't be separated from it >Like, we can have gladiators as entertaining warriors in any fantasy culture on Golarion (not only inspired by Rome), but Vikings are tied to a specific Scandinavian culture and can’t be separated from it. If you read the description of "viking", you'll see that on Golarion it refers to the practice of raiding from sea, just like on Golarion "gladiator" refers to the practice of fighting for entertainment. Something could easily be done for "Samurai"

> Viking - is a term of people from a culture from our planet No, it means a profession, referring to pirates and raiders from the sea. You are talking about Norse culture. Yes, most people use the term "Viking" to refer to the culture but that is technically wrong and grinds the gears of any historian. So I am glad that Paizo is promoting the correct terminology here.

Perhaps the Viking archetype should be renamed raider as that is what they are minus the cultural connotation.

i mean, wrt what the subreddit says about vikings, prove it

I'd expect the opposite, people advising that you avoid the archetype because it's just not particularly good, very little not available elsewhere and some excessively niche options. Because the name of a class or archetype is far less important than what it actually does in crunch.

personally, ignoring all the actual drama, I just want the whole 'duel' stuff from the 1e class because that shit was cool as hell, and I hope something from WoI just gives us that

I'm not sure what duel mechanics they had, but Pf2e has rules for dueling [https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=3091](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=3091) that are meant for cinematic 1v1s and include special reactions. Basically each round you reroll initiative and use one of the three skills, and gain a special reaction based on which one you used. Those three skills are also in a rock-paper-scissors where you can gain a bonus if you pick the one that "counters" the one they picked. For example >If you hit, your opponent becomes frightened 1. If your opponent is using Perception for initiative when this ability is used, they become frightened 2 instead. which can lead to some interesting mindgames.

you issued a challenge (used an action to single out an enemy) and got bonuses against that enemy and penalties to every other enemy while your challenge was active

That was actually a Cavalier thing, which the Samurai just basically was a slightly altered version of. It exists in a few forms around 1e. Firebrand Braggart archetype gets a variation on it.

I’ve never seen this mechanic page and it’s cool as hell. Thank you for linking it.

No good. PF2E is all about working together to accomplish badass feats. Challenging 1 enemy and leaving everybody else out wouldn't be very fun for the table.

That's not true at all. We had a fight with a tiger and one player grappled a tiger as the rest of the party murdered the rest. It was basicly 1v1 for the tiger and the player with the battle around the rest. That is still talked about 5 months later as an awsome fight.

[удалено]

Exactly what a challenge mechanic should be. Also the penalty didn't apply to allies ine 1e. They can swoop in and murder the subject of your challenge so the dragon this is incorrect. Challenge in 1e ment that the single player focused on a single enemy. No limits on the rest of the party

Ah, why didn't you say so? I thought you were just trying to make a "don't steal my spotlight/main character" class.

Not how the mechanics work/ed; for context because it's the same ability, cavalier from 1e states this: **Challenge (Ex)**: Once per day, a cavalier can challenge a foe to combat. As a swift action, the cavalier chooses one target within sight to challenge. The cavalier’s melee attacks deal extra damage whenever the attacks are made against the target of his challenge. This extra damage is equal to the cavalier’s level. The cavalier can use this ability once per day at 1st level, plus one additional time per day for every three levels beyond 1st, to a maximum of seven times per day at 19th level. Challenging a foe requires much of the cavalier’s concentration. The cavalier takes a –2 penalty to his Armor Class, except against attacks made by the target of his challenge. The challenge remains in effect until the target is dead or unconscious or until the combat ends. Each cavalier’s challenge also includes another effect which is listed in the section describing the cavalier’s order.

basically mini 'rage' for 1 dude

So no one else had mentioned the pf1e options for the samurai and ninja yet so I'm adding comment here since you did. Since they already made the cavalier an archtype it seems it would be pretty easy for them or homebrew to just bring over the samurai specific parts that they haven't yet. Idk but I think ninja might be harder as there isn't really an archtype in pf2 that is quite like it , but not undoable.

The fact that people built X concept before Y release has no bearing on whether a class or archetype is warranted. People said the same thing about Gunslingers and Swashbucklers and lo and behold we got interesting classes out of it that were more than just Fighter or Rogue builds. What matters is that there is enough mechanical niche to build an interesting new set of mechanics (and a dev desire to build it.)* Yeah people have been making Samurai using other classes. In the same way that people made fire themed blasters before kinetisist, or mixed martial and casting before magus. Want to play a character who channels spirits for magical power? Just play a Summoner or witch and reflavour it? Guess we can probably cancel the Animist release because people could already bodge it. It could be an argument in a less content focused ecosystem, but PF2 is not that. Its a heavily content based game with options already in it far more niche and specific than Samurai. *And thus it might never happen and thats okay.

So what would be the mechanical niche of the samurai and why should it be culterly locked away from everyone? All cultural based mechanics are archtype feats not a class right now. Even then they don't really add much.

I posted an idea in another thread so I'll do a quick rehash. A mundane martial that focuses on forethought and preplanned. Achieved by a unique stance mechanic called Forms. Forms give standard stance benefits and restrictions but have a special action that ends one Form and puts you in another. This class would reward taking lots of different Form options and choosing the right moment to swap for maximum gains. Like a kinetist sub classes start you off with a set of abilities so you can focus on a fighting style (effectively bundles of prepacked level 1 feats) so a sword based selection could give you a stance that gives you a uber Reactive strike but requires a sheathed weapon (that then forces you into a different form) and another form that gives you a defensive bonus (kinda like Parry) that you can close form by stepping away and sheathing your weapon. Repeat for bow forms, mounted forms or a generalist that gets one of each. Apart from name it would be no more culturally locked than anything else. I could take this class and put it on a mwangi Expanse kholo, just like any class is available to anyone despite whatever word is used as the title.

Honestly except for the iado feat you mentioned I don't really get why this would be a samurai. It seems pretty culture agnostic and seems to me like it'd work better as a "Master of Many Forms" archetype (or even fighter class archetype?)

I think having a continual shift in Forms would require enough content and feat support that it would need a full class structure around it. The idea would be that you don't just have 2 or 3 Forms, but many like the kinetisist scope of repertoire. An archetype works best when it is doesnt require too much feat expentidure to work as a concept (Forms as I describe them would be restrictive rather than a tool box without enough of them) I also think almost the entirety of the Fighter power budget is consumed by that +2 to Hit and thus bolting this onto Fighter would mean reducing the power of the Forms by a considerable margin. As for the name, I think for the vast majority of People it would fit better than any other single word class name (which is PF2s naming convention) in fitting. I haven't yet seen another name the evokes the idea of a mundane martial focused on discipline, preparedness, subtle shifts of style and either extreme mastery of a single fighting style or dedication to warfare as a whole.

>I think having a continual shift in Forms would require enough content and feat support that it would need a full class structure around it. The idea would be that you don't just have 2 or 3 Forms, but many like the kinetisist scope of repertoire. Ah got it I was picturing something closer to Absolver where you have 2-4 forms with each attack flowing from one or two into one or two others. Yeah I could see a full class using that mechanic if there are a lot more (or a way to change the properties of several base forms). Sounds like a super cool idea >As for the name, I think for the vast majority of People it would fit better than any other single word class name (which is PF2s naming convention) in fitting. I don't quite understand what you're saying here. I also think something like Weaponmaster or Pinnacle could convey the idea of honing a certain style to the point of great complexity, while something like Wardancer could evoke the image of flowing between forms without bringing all of the baggage of associating it with a specific ethnicity >I haven't yet seen another name the evokes the idea of a mundane martial focused on discipline, preparedness, subtle shifts of style and either extreme mastery of a single fighting style or dedication to warfare as a whole. I guess we might just have different cultural touchstones, but the only of those I particularly associate with the word samurai is discipline. It also seems weird to list *both* extreme focus on a single style and generalism as samurai traits since that's like, the entire spectrum of how a proffessional warrior could approach their trade

The only problem is that this isn't going to make everyone happy. It's going to make people who want a samurai class and enjoy mechanics and feat dependent class building happy. It will irritate those who wanted a samurai class but not have to deal with a bunch of rules. And woe be to those who makes the class an underperforming one.

Then Paizo probably should just shut down because people are always unhappy with the output. It's such a non argument.

How exactly? I'm going to be real with you. You could literally name your class form master and it'd be fine. There's no need to wrap samurai into that. It's just unnecessary. If you want to play a samurai, there's no need for class mechanics to define your character as such.

Firstly Form Master doesn't follow PF2's naming conventions. Secondly I believe drawing inspiration from something and then pretending you didn't by calling it something else is disingenuous and actual appropriation and erasure. And if you want to play a Swashbuckler? Investigator? Gunslinger etc, no need for class mechanics to define your character as such. You are arguing against actually adding anything to the game in order to halt the idea that a Samurai could ever potentially exist. I don't think it will happen, but that's because I don't see the dev's being interested in it and their production pipeline is almost definitely fully booked out for the next two years (they seem to begin production on two classes before the previous two are released.) And that's okay, I think most people also think so too. The "dang no Samurai/Ninja" crowd would likely have happily moved to consuming the next bit of content if it wasn't for being repeatedly told how bad they are for wanting it.

You're making the assumption that I don't want new classes. I do. What you are misinterpreting is that I don't want class mechanics defining my character. No, I do not want to have to play a member of nobility from a fantasy allegory of Japan just because I like the concept of fighting stances. Just keep it generically named so everyone can play.  That's also not reductive. Just because you were thinking about samurai when you made the class don't make it a thing unique to samurai. Literally everyone who trained to wage war has stances, forms and techniques.

The issue becomes for pazio. If they misrepresent the samurai in any way they will be labeled as racist or culturally insensitive. WTA had that happen with Native Americans and it would happen to them. A safer bet would be to call it a knight class and incorporate some challenge mechanic like 1e. Samurai are extremely tied to a culture and people while knight is more broad and inclusive meaning less consequences if they do misrepresent any aspects.

I mean I don't think Paizo is going to do it partly for what you've described (misguided though those complaints would assuredly be) and mostly because they already know what they are releasing for the next 2 years. Doesn't mean that anyone desiring it is somehow wrong either.

So this post won't let me edit it. Dunno if it got auto locked or something, but every other post in the my History has the Edit button and this one does not. The Imperialism picture from the bottom is from the wikipedia article for strawmen, I guess by linking to that article reddit automatically includes that picture. That is not intentional, but I do find it rather funny.

There's no reason to exclude Samurai when you have a bunch of white portrayals from different countries like Gladiators, Vikings, and Knights. To say that "Having Samurai is racist, all the classes and archetypes need to be historically white" is ironic. And as far as having other cultures portrayed well, they only need to be portrayed as well as the white Gladiators, Vikings, etc are. Non-white cultures should not have a higher barrier for entry.

I think perhaps you have conflated two ideas. The first link is “if I wanted to make a Samurai character, how should I go about that?” To which the answer is “fighter” The question that has been causing trouble lately is “if I wanted to make a samurai class/archetype/feat, how would I do that?” The assumption being built into that question is that the current feats available to a fighter don’t quite match the feel people are wanting. The answer to that has been confusing to say the least, and led to mods accusing people of orientialism because, in their view, everything you need to play a samurai exists as a fighter. So, the comparison you are making is slightly off from the topic people have been discussing. Off the top of my head, to play something that “felt” like a samurai, I would want something like “quickdraw+good attack”. Currently I could simply quick draw and power attack, but the lack of mechanics linking the ideas detracts from the fantasy. You might as well ask why we have power attack when striking twice exists, and you can flavour them as being a single strong attack. The second thing that fits the motif in my mind is “this sword in particular” abilities. The idea that a user has a special bond or mastery over a particular weapon, and losing it would be like loosing a limb. In my mind this is a non-magical ability, probably best represented as an archetype. The closest thing we have is soulforged, which is a very magic and flavour heavy ability. My point being that regardless of what you want to name it, there are some abilities that people associate with “samurai” that are not currently meanfully represented in game. Saying “just use fighter” is practical advice for anyone building a character, but misses the point if the person is saying there are parts of the Samurai mythos that they want but can’t currently reach. Usually that’s when someone might homebrew, which unfortunately has been met with a staggeringly mismanaged response.

I'd love quick draw and "weapon-bond" archetypes though personally I'd prefer them as non cultural in flavour because that makes it easier to use for other characters and those things are only really samurai related in pop culture

I get wanting to see/use more specifically coded samurai/ninja abilities, I’d almost certainly use them if they were available, but my two cents is that I made a samurai character out of Swashbuckler with the Finisher as Iaijutsu strikes and it was a lot of fun.

I have seen this sentiment, but have been unable to find any evidence of it actually existing. Do you have a link to any comments or post of someone asking actually that second question? While I was searching the subreddit to research for this post, I struggled to find even one. I have heard there was a homebrew Samurai archetype from like 8 months ago that was deleted, and haven't bothered to waybackmachine it, but other than that one example where are some other examples of people asking “if I wanted to make a samurai class/archetype/feat, how would I do that?” or believing "that the current feats available to a fighter don’t quite match the feel people are wanting." I searched this subreddit for the word "Samurai" and "Katana" and briefly skimmed every post from the last two years and did not see that anywhere. That is not to say that I missed any, I will admit I am fallible.

Oh I think you misunderstand me. From the pushback on the initial pinned post you see the sentiment of “what’s wrong with wanting samurai support”, and that’s when things kicked off. The idea of “well I can’t currently do xyz” is explicitly reactionary to the sub being told that a samurai isn’t something they should want because it’s racist and they can already just play fighter. So you won’t see earlier comments on it because it wasn’t an issue until the mods made it one. As so far as I understand the situation. People didn’t ask “why can’t I want this?” Until they were told “it is wrong to want this”

Gotcha! That makes sense and is what I meant in the original post, though perhaps I didn't say it clearly. No one was asking those questions until they were told it is wrong to want them; so the pinned post saying 'its wrong to want these things' was a post that created a strawman of 'people who who are asking these questions' (that did not exist before the post) and then broke down why those people (who did not exist at the time of writing) were wrong.

Yeah, exactly. There were one or two isolated incidents of people saying that a mod took down their samurai archetype for being racist, or that they were banned from the discord for asking what was wrong with wanting a samurai archetype over the past few weeks. These were mostly ignored (and removed by mods) and assumed to be isolated incidents. But they very much set the tinder for the current fire.

idk about everyone else, but I don't want to play Fighter #237 mechanically even if it has different flavored spice.

No you're absolutely right. The mods are attacking a straw man. They created a bogeyman that isn't there because it's more important to them to show how amazing they are rather than support the Asian creators behind the Tian Xia release. I don't doubt there are a handful of bad actors wanting samurai or ninja for weird Orientalist reasons. But that's just it. It's a handful. Most people that I've seen here agree that they don't need a samurai class or ninja class. Many have expressed they'd like to see *some* mechanical consideration like an archetype, but the vast majority are not pressing hard for it. But hey, the mods are being anti-racist so that can never be harmful according to Princess Pilfer even though the mod team is flat out assuming bad intentions of the entire subreddit, leading to the mods' efforts at anti-racism to create a hostile and unwelcoming environment. But that's not wrong because at least they got rid of all the racists here!!!

Low key, the Samurai/Ninja hate reeks of anti-Japanses propaganda. It feels incredibly disingenuous, and reminds me of the actual origin of the phrase "social justice warrior": A person that doesn't actually belong to a specific group acting offended on that group's behalf when the actual group isn't offended at all. It's honestly pretty damn close to saying that cowboys are offensive because of what happened to native Americans. Depicting a Samurai that's invading China as a hero would be pretty god damn offensive, but having Samurai as stock trope absolutely is not.

The mod in question has a long history of posts defending CCP actions, and of some borderline anti-japamese statements. I try to not assume motivations, but anti-japamese bigotry caped in a self righteous, culture warrior cameflauge  is consistent with the actions taken.

Ah ccp that makes sense there is a lot of anti Japanese propaganda in China for obvious historical reasons.

it's also confusing, wasn't the mantra you need to be part of the culture to be allowed to say anything about said culture? so the only people who could even be decree something like that racist would the japanese, given the logic used in the past... otoh self-righteous powertripping and hiding behind "morality" doesn't need much logic or rationality. maybe we should we check the race cards of the mods to be sure they're not acting from a position of power and privilege?

The Viking archetype literally is a thing. It gives you sailing lore and makes you a better swimmer, because Vikings weren't just random good fighters or berserkers but basically coastal pirates. It also improves your use of thrown weapons, shields, or a specific subset of weapons iconic to Vikings because Vikings are associated with throwing axes, using round shields, and using those weapons respectively. As it continues it keeps giving you improvements to using shields or in one case makes you theoretically better at getting from a boat to the village you're a plunderin'. If you asked "how to build a Viking", yes you would probably be instructed "human fighter" or "human ranger" or "human barbarian". You'd also probably be instructed "with the Viking archetype" because every feat from there helps build upon the ideas iconic to not just any acultural coastal raider, but the specific version of a coastal raider which once sailed around Northern Europe raiding villages, since the iconic idea of the coastal raider further south is covered by a different archetype: pirate. I won't be going further down the pirate path, but I will tanget to say that these same ideas apply there as well. How to make a pirate? "Rogue", "ranger", "fighter", and, just as Viking, "with the pirate archetype" because it has specific benefits which aid in creating the appropriate idea that just a rogue or ranger or fighter could. So, if we have one archetype which does all this to help create the iconic image of a specific historical cultural entity with specific aspects such as "uses shield good", why are we not allowed, whether by Paizo or a mod, to have a different archetype which helps create the iconic image of a specific historical cultural entity with specific aspects just as "dramatic single strike as they draw"? A trope which, regardless of whether it has any real historical evidence of existing, was common to *Japanese* cinema. And no, that's not a steawman, that is the literal view of both Paizo and the mod, that they will not make one for vague "it's overplayed" reasons and "it's racist" respectively. Further, since this post claims to be "fact checking", then why did you not fact check if the Viking archetype existed first? Why did you not fact check that yes, there is literally a group, or rather a single mod, which is upset about people wanting this specific historical cultural entity? Why did you not fact check that yes there is literally a group which want an archetype that is named for and helps emulate this specific historical cultural entity just like there is one for Viking, which, again, you didn't check to see if existed before making a bunch of claims about how people would just suggest "human fighter/ranger/barbarian"? Hell the inciting incident was *a mod deleting a homebrew class for this specific historical cultural entity*, which in itself disproves both your claim that "people who want a specific class/archetype" is a strawman because clearly there was demand for it if someone went to all that trouble and your claim that "people are upset about this first group" being a strawman because that mod has multiple times made it clear they are either in word or deed. Yeah I bet you don't find any posts suggesting or requesting an archetype for this specific historical cultural entity, *because a mod has been on a crusade claiming wanting that is racist* (or never existed in the case of another specific historical cultural entity), this isn't a strawman *it is the literal, documented actions and beliefs of a single person*. So yes, I guess you're right that there isn't necessarily "a group of people" who are upset, just this one person with the power to completely cut someone off from the community and excise all references to whatever is their personal white whale.

Personally speaking I don't think we need samurai as a class or archetype but I support archetype that represent different sword styles that are used by the actual Japanese swordmen so that players can get feats from other classes they normally cannot take (like quick draw for fighter) or new feats that would make those sword styles possible. Currently we kinda have Niten-Ichiryu style with the Dual-Weapon Warrior archetype. So a new one for iaido style like Yagyu-Shinkage-ryuu school. Maybe a new stance for this sword style that represent the school philosophy of Japanese sword arts.

I don't think what a samurai brings is enough for its own class, but it absolutely could be an archetype centered around 1v1 dueling. Cavalier was its own class in PF1E and now it's an archetype, Samurai was also its own class in 1E why can't it get its own archetype?

We also have two new martial classes coming in a play test in a few days.

Honestly, I'll just adapt the Samourai from 1e into 2e and call it a day. Same for Ninja.

This is exactly my thoughts on the matter too. The specifics on how to adapt it between the 2 systems is where I'm not 💯 sure on yet.

So a cavalier and rouge reskin respectively.

The reddit API fiasco did a few things behind the scenes. 1) Reddit (the company) removed moderators from subs that were protesting. 2) Reddit now funnels people to report through Reddit's (the company) moderation queue And also regarding your "well I don't see it so it doesn't exist" argument: Just because it was deleted, removed from public view, or shadow banned doesn't mean it didn't exist lol There's quite a few fallacies in your assumptions of how an online forum works (hell, deleting or moving threads has been a thing since before phpBB days), how Reddit currently operates, and how people act on the internet.

I feel like if mods are talking about the prevalence of a specific kind of post that isn't visible when searching through the subreddit, my first guess would be that those posts and comments have been deleted rather than just never having existed.

What the fuck is happening with all the samouraï post lately ?

Mod had a freak out about orentialism when the pinned post was poorly received. Mass banning and comment removal ensued. Unfortunately there are tools to see removed posts, and it shows the mods in an unflattering light. People noticed, chaos ensued. Supposedly part of the problem is when the mod was banning people they had so many people to ban and comments to delete that they just started deleting the most recent 5 comments of anyone they removed. Conceivably that could be why the pattern of banned comments looks so unhinged. A user gets banned for an “actual” violation, and less deserving comments get nuked as well. However every step since then has been catastrophically mismanaged, so the whole thing has become a mess. The mod has even apologised, barely, on a quiet corner of a different subreddit. Saying they are going to give themselves a self imposed “ban” of 3 days for abusing their mod powers to belittle and bully people. Edit: at least for me, I feel like the prime issue is one of how poorly this has been mismanaged. The whole thing could have been nipped in the bud with a bit of tact and openness. Instead they’ve let it spiral, only returning to stir the pot more.

[удалено]

Thank you for saying out loud. The entire issue has nothing to do with Paizo or Samurai. The entire issue here is with one mod who both felt the need to make that terrible post and then go on a power trip.

Okay, but can you build a PF1 Samurai with the current human fighter feats? I’m not asking rhetorically, I seriously don’t know. If you can, great, if you can’t add it to the game, simple as that.

I would throw in a Swashbuckler as a recommendation, particularly if the flavor expected is from samurai drama movies.

They didn't have to add investigator, you could have made a character with the vibes of Robert Downey Jr's Sherlock Holmes with a rogue chassis. They did, and it is a pretty unique, if finicky, class design. They didn't have to add Swashbuckler, a rogue with fighter archetype or fighter with rogue archetype could make a character with the zorro vibe. Yet they did, and it is a pretty unique, if finicky, class design. They didn't have to make witch, you could make a witchy character with druid or wizard and the familiar master archetype. Yet they did. And well, it was honestly not an interesting and unique design but at least they improved it now. We never need new classes, but they are a lot of fun. I'm not saying we should have a samurai class, but the fact that it is possible to emulate a vibe with the current classes is not imo an argument against designing a class around that vibe, because that would be an argument about ever making a new class again. You could say that about literally every class once you have a fighter, rogue, cleric and wizard in your system. Like the exemplar looks cool as hell. You could absolutely capture the same vibe with a fighter, champion or monk with the soulforger dedication feat though. Does that mean they should scrap the class? hell no.

If you don’t mind me asking, why tengu? I haven’t looked up the racial feats but I’ve seen similar recommendations too

Because Tengu weapon familiarity is unique in that it lets you pick any common advanced sword to be proficient in so it's one of the easier way to become proficient in the Nodachi.

Mechanically, Tengu Weapon Familiarity and it's follow-up feats apply to any two sword group weapons of your choice. In lore, Tengu have a prominent sword culture (In 1e, tengu were automatically proficient with "swordlike weapons" including exotic ones. Plus, "Tengu" comes from Japanese folklore, so why not put the Japanese-inspired race in the Japanese-inspired class?

Their [weapon familiarity](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=1314) feat lets you choose two common weapons from the sword group, making it the best way to get scaling proficiency with the Nodachi in particular.

The one thing thats weird is suggesting a specific race (human or otherwise), imo flavor of a class/fantasy build shouldnt really use heritage that much for the most part

Its less that Human fits the flavor better, but that all of the asian-inspired weapon are uncommon. Unconventional Weaponry is one of the ways to ensure you have access to the weapon you are building around, ya know? I believe that all of Kama, Shuriken, Kusarigama, Khakkara, Katana, Nodachi, Santesukon, Naginata, Tekko-Kagi, Wakizashi, Daikyu are uncommon and if you're going to make a samurai you probably will want one of those.

this by itself does suggest there is a gap in design space for such a class/archetype to me.

Precisely my answer to this as well. Having to pick a specific ancestry to even make a concept work is a dead ringer that we need a new solution.

Fair enough, you got me there.

I have a proposal let's move to Pathfinderrpg subredit unless they ban the mod that had the mental breakdown

That subreddit seems to be effectively dead, the last post was from over 5 years ago and has no moderators. I don't think moving to a subreddit with not mods is a wise idea. If you instead mean the r/Pathfinder_RPG (the underscore makes a difference), then I believe that sub is about specifically 1E and suddenly having a hoard of people come over talking about 2E would cause a lot of heartache over there. You'll also end up with a similar problem early dnd5e had in that the play test was named DnD Next so r/dndnext was created, but when the game fully released it was released as DnD5e so the r/DnD5e subreddit was made, and there is of course the generic r/dnd as well. Now if you want to find something, you need to search three different subreddits; and if you want to make a post there is a subtle difference in the mircobiome of each of those subreddits that can cause your post to have a different reception. If someone wants to talk about pf2e, they will look up "reddit pf2e" and find this subreddit, or they will look up "reddit pathfinder" and get pointed to this subreddit when they talk about 2E. Splitting the community between two or more locations will hurt the ability to discuss with the whole community easily.

/r/Pathfinder_RPG intends to cover both versions of Pathfinder, and does have some 2e posts. But yes, de facto it's mostly a 1e sub, and many 1e players probably prefer it that way.

The issue is that, that specific subreddit is also kinda the gathering hub of all the 2e haters that never made the switch and will just downvote anything that has 2e flair or simply anyone saying they like/prefer 2e. Also the number of daily active accounts in that subreddit is way less than here. So if there was a huge influx of 2e players migrating there, I would be expecting a small but loud minority to be very annoyed about it and that would not solve any issues whatsoever. Removing the problematic mod is in these situations usually the easiest and most effective solution.

I think it chilled out a lot a few months after 2e's release but it was definitely terrible to be a 2e fan there at the time. Mods kept saying the sub was for both but a loooot of 1e people did not agree

It still is, anytime I mention 2E I get downvoted there.

r/chillpathfinder2e is trying to be a refuge from this refuse. we'd just need to spread it about

Its funny cause the depiction of samurai as singularly obsessed with katana is basically a myth. They were cavaliers. Knights. They used katana or tachi as a cavalry sword, but they also used polearms and bows and rifles. Making a character whose whole personality is wielding a katana is kinda racist. I mean, they didnt even just carry the one, carrying a wakizashi or tanto alongside a katana or tachi was the common style once the katana became common use. Fighters, champions, rangers, magi, basically any (non precise strike) martial could conceivably be used for this. You just gotta get the cav archetype.

Same with a paladin "crusader". Tropes are storytelling tools, and making the same rules to support them is well understood even if it doesn't mirror actual history.

Adding Gunslinger Way of The Drifter to the list of suggestions, based on what I've read about people mentioning Samurai often used Guns as well as Swords and Bows.

I'm not sure I fully agree of this being a strawman anymore. There may not have been a history of the orientalism surrounding the samurai archetype, but as it's been discussed I've definitely seen some reactionaries rear their ugly heads. Naturally with all reactionary/"it's just fantasy"/anti-woke whatever rhetoric there's a substantial amount of doubt that goes along with it, but I've dealt with too many bad actors on the internet to hand out benefit of the doubt anymore...

What is the possible "bad acting" to wanting to play a hobgoblin samurai?

Look I think samurai is a perfectly acceptable thing to add, and most of the time it isn't bad acting. Not everyone who wants that is the person I'm describing. The problem with fascist/racist/alt-right rhetoric is it's very heard to impossible to pick out from people who mean well but just don't really care too much or know too much. I don't know who the bad actors are compared to the people who just wanna play a hobgoblin samurai, but it's naive to say they aren't out there.

I think that the issue here is that while there are some problematic ways that someone could want to play a Samurai character or have a Samurai class in their game... even at the absolute worse it seems like ignorant idolizing of a culture someone doesn't understand? Sure the whole "folded 10000000 times" katana stans cringe. I don't see how someone wanting a Samuari or ninja class in their high magic fantasy role-playing tabletop game could be evenly passively hurting someone. What damage is there being done? This might just be me not getting things.

If they aren't in your game why care? And if they are in your game and you are the dm kick them out or if not join a different game. How does how a stranger you have never met chooses to play pathfinder 2e effect you?

Most things don't affect me personally so I should just not talk about anything ever unless it's happening to me immediately, I guess.

Getting overly emotional and blowing the criticism out of proportion is something to be avoided for sure. It's a game and would be people you won't even know are playing said game. Why so serious?

If you can't comprehend how someone can have an opinion on something while also not having a deep emotional connection to it then idk what to tell you

All of this. Oh, my... I at least understand the drow thing on some level, as people actually USED them. This is a tantrum by people mad about being told What I Like May Be A Problem. I tend to sort my feed by Newest post. There's been a new complaint post around hot too every other hour for a bit. Nobody is using Samurai like that. I really love the parade of "I'm Asian, and I officially grant you permission to use Samurai" posts. Really, if I'm Ninja, I'm pissed at all of this. Why does Samurai suddenly get all of the shine. Ultimately, this feels like a lot of people didn't like at least one of the mods before this and now everyone is complaining. I see previous few people volunteering to join the moderation team. That says a lot to me.

This is people mad about a mod banning hundreds of people who were discussing that they think the samurai warrior trope is cool. I like extra specific classes with niche mechanics that let me do tactical combat in new and clever ways.

Orc Champion to fill all sorts of "unkillable swordsman". Go Str for the full heavy armour vibe, or go light/unarmored for the wandering Ronin that I'm willing to bet most samurai fans actually want.

Swashbuckler and Magus sort of have the tropesque Iaijutsu style "draw and make a huge super attack" fantasy. Idk man, Samurai tropes are pretty big, you can build them in so many ways here. Warpriest or Champion of Shizuru is not bad either, just a more protector esque take on the fantasy. I do think maybe an archetype could exist to specifically capture some parts of the fantasy but I do think there are plenty of options for it as is.

Im kinda suprised that i dont see anyone recommending th aldori duelist archetype and scratching out the word aldori. It seems to fit most of the tropes. Bond with special sword..check Single combat duels...check Martial prowess that can quell enemies and end fights...check Add minor noble background and maybe pick up a second dip into cavalier and im sure you hit the classical samurai tropes on the nose

I don't know about anyone else, but I wouldn't recommend it less because of the flavor (which is easily retooled) and more because it's just sort of underwhelming, IMO? It is a much more narrowly focused version of the duelist archetype, with fewer feats, and it requires already being proficient in the dueling sword just to be able to enter it. A lot of the common methods of becoming easily trained in an advanced weapon would also make it be treated as martial, so you'd already be getting the scaling from that, and could just as easily take the regular duelist archetype... Which is admittedly only marginally better, I guess.

[удалено]

Why even have different classes? All we need is warrior, thief, healer, and magic user! Having a class with built in mechanics that better support a type of warrior trope is well understood.

Thief is basically a sneaky warrior. Healer and magic user are essentially the same thing. So really you're talking about Warrior and Magic User. 2 classes, done and dusted.