How would you change O D & D? [Archive] - Wizards Community

How would you change O D & D? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Kineon_War
12-25-07, 01:51 AM I'm currently running an OD & D campaign and have encountered some problems with O D & D.

Personally, I thought the first O D & D book was better than the second.
I know the martial arts rules were very powerful but still it had more in it.
The 3.0 version seemed to be more about selling the L5R game and Rokugan world.
(I know the first version focused on Kara-tur but it seemed to have a lot more generally applicable stuff too.

Anyway, I thought that I'd start this thread about what you think you'd change about D & D. This is more for lists of changes with possibility of links to other threads where the answer to individual problems has been discussed in more detail.

Enjoy...
Kineon_War
12-25-07, 02:05 AM My List:

1. Both books seemed to focus on Chinese and Japanese culture, with Indian culture thrown in as an after thought. There was nothing about Korea and precious little except lip service to South East Asia.

2. No Ninja class (mentioned by others).

3. Too much promotion of the individual worlds that each book was made to market, not enough about designing your own O D & D worlds.

4. Monster Manuals needed more monsters and more development.

5. No distinction between Japanese and Chinese elements leading to a blur of cultures.

6. In the 3.0 addtion, the martial arts seemed to lack flavour.

7. In the 3.0 edition, most of the non-human races just seemed to be animal-people variations.

8. 3.0 edition had less Asian flavour than the A D & D version.

9. Much of the "Asian" stuff seemed to be more about Western perceptions of Asia rather than actual Asian stuff. (I currently live in South Korea and have travelled the region well).

10. There should be cool Kung-fu stuff like the Book of Nine Swords.

11. There was no "metal" element in the Shukenja spells.
12. there was no Daimyo class or Geisha class.

13. The other problems with the D 20 system are still in it.
Count Arioch the 28th
12-25-07, 10:58 AM 2. No Ninja class (mentioned by others).

It's called a Rogue.

12. there was no Daimyo class or Geisha class.

Aristocrat and expert, respectively.
narukagami
12-25-07, 01:10 PM 1. Both books seemed to focus on Chinese and Japanese culture, with Indian culture thrown in as an after thought. There was nothing about Korea and precious little except lip service to South East Asia. Its hard to do regions of the world without actually writing about said regions, and if you lurk around you'll notice there seems to be this underlying animosity towards using real world things in game as represented in the real world. So if they did do that people will just complain.

But I do agree.

2. No Ninja class (mentioned by others). See Count's response.

3. Too much promotion of the individual worlds that each book was made to market, not enough about designing your own O D & D worlds. Thats the problem with not being enough of a generic toolbox and having a featured campaign setting. At least Kara-tur was more diverse than Rokugan, though.

4. Monster Manuals needed more monsters and more development. Just as long as its not like Green Ronin's "Silliness and Stereotypes".... er... I mean, "Jade Dragons and Hungry Ghosts."

5. No distinction between Japanese and Chinese elements leading to a blur of cultures. Again, Rokugan's fault.

6. In the 3.5 addtion, the martial arts seemed to lack flavour. There is no 3.5 OA book.

7. In the 3. edition, most of the non-human races just seemed to be animal-people variations. Animal people seemed to be a common element in most East Asian myth, there isn't a whole lot else that isn't some kind of evil troublemaker or near godly beast.

8. 3.5 edition had less Asian flavour than the A D & D version. I think you mean 3.0 version, as I said above, there is no 3.5 OA book (though it has been updated using Dragon issue 318). But anyway. Thats Rokugan's fault, again. (Side note: You ever notice that when people are talking about "Asia" they usually just mean "Japan?")

9. Much of the "Asian" stuff seemed to be more about Western perceptions of Asia rather than actual Asian stuff. (I currently live in South Korea and have travelled the region well). Rokugan... again.

10. There should be cool Kung-fu stuff like the Book of Nine Swords. Well, if the 4ed previews are any indication, that won't be a problem.

11. There was no "metal" element in the Wujen spells. Actually there was no mention of the Chinese 5 element style at all, the whole book seemed to be more geared towards the Japanese elemental system: fire, wind, water, earth and void. There was metal, are you sure you're looking at the right book?

12. there was no Daimyo class or Geisha class. Because there shouldn't be. Ever.

13. The other problems with the D 20 system are still in it. Of course they are... because it the d20 system still.
Kineon_War
12-26-07, 01:15 AM It's called a Rogue.

Aristocrat and expert, respectively.

Yes, I agree that the Rogue makes an excellent Ninja type but I think that if you added a Ninjitsu martial art, that the rogue could spend feats on to gain other ninja-like powers then that would be really cool.

Aristocrat and Expert are NPC classes.

I like the Noble from Conan RPG.
Basically the Aristocrat plus some feats.

Conan RPG also has the Temptress, which is interesting but not quite the Geisha.
I read in another forum about modifying a bard and I might give that some thought.
Kineon_War
12-26-07, 01:29 AM Thank you for drawing my attention to the 3.5 typos.
I have changed them.

There is no 3.5 OA book.

snip snip snip

I think you mean 3.0 version, as I said above, there is no 3.5 OA book (though it has been updated using Dragon issue 318). But anyway. Thats Rokugan's fault, again. (Side note: You ever notice that when people are talking about "Asia" they usually just mean "Japan?")
Kineon_War
12-26-07, 01:36 AM Doh!
The Shukenja does not have metal.
The Wujen does.

There was metal, are you sure you're looking at the right book?
Kineon_War
12-26-07, 01:50 AM So do either of you have any ideas about what you would change in O D & D?
narukagami
12-26-07, 01:50 AM Doh!
The Shukenja does not have metal.
The Wujen does. Ah, I see.

The OA shugenja only has the Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Void style element list because its a d20 version of the Legend of the Five Rings shugenja. Its limited to that element style because those are the L5R elements.

The shugenja is quite the oddity if you ask me. It has little to nothing to do with the "shugenja" of Japanese origin. The OA shaman class is probably a lot closer, really.
I honestly think when the L5R writers cooked up this concept of an elementalist spellcaster for their world and wanted to tack a Japanese name to it, they just looked up terms associated with magic users in Japanese culture. They couldn't just use the Japanese words for "magic user" because they already associated "maho tsukai" with evil blood magic (probably another decision made at random), so they were left with "Shugenja" and "Onmyoji" and probably flipped a coin...
Kineon_War
12-26-07, 01:53 AM Yes, I agree with your assessment of the shukenja.
The shaman is much more like the Shukenja should be.
I think the shaman should be changed as well.

Ah, I see.

The OA shugenja only has the Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Void style element list because its a d20 version of the Legend of the Five Rings shugenja. Its limited to that element style because those are the L5R elements.

The shugenja is quite the oddity if you ask me. It has little to nothing to do with the "shugenja" of Japanese origin. The OA shaman class is probably a lot closer, really.
I honestly think when the L5R writers cooked up this concept of an elementalist spellcaster for their world and wanted to tack a Japanese name to it, they couldn't just use the Japanese words for "magic user" because they already associated "maho tsukai" with evil blood magic (probably another decision made at random), so they were left with "Shugenja" and "Onmyoji" and probably flipped a coin...
narukagami
12-26-07, 01:56 AM So do either of you have any ideas about what you would change in O D & D? I would also suggest different subsections on things derived from different cultures, mainly for organization and convenience if anything. Probably another section on adopting occidental D&D stuff into an OA campaign...

Also, at least a blurb explaining the difference between historical accuracy and cultural authenticity. :P
narukagami
12-26-07, 02:00 AM OH, on the subject of martial arts, more styles involving weapons and maybe specialty paths for all classes. (Caster-fu, anyone?)
heretic888
12-26-07, 11:46 PM It's called a Rogue.

Actually, its called the Swordsage. Zing! :D
Count Arioch the 28th
12-27-07, 12:17 AM Actually, its called the Swordsage. Zing! :D

Either way, I think we can agree that you can be a "ninja" without having the word "ninja" written on your character sheet.
Kineon_War
12-27-07, 12:50 AM Either way, I think we can agree that you can be a "ninja" without having the word "ninja" written on your character sheet.

You can do that with many classes though:

Assassin = anyone who gets paid to kill things.

etc.

Can a wizard who gets into fights, call themselves a fighter?

I still think a Ninjitsu martial art is the answer to this.
Count Arioch the 28th
12-27-07, 01:23 AM Can a wizard who gets into fights, call themselves a fighter?

"Fighter" isn't a historical archetype. It's a D&D archetype. There has never been anyone in history that has identified themselves as a "fighter". Warrior, certainly. Knight, but of course. Myrmidon, perhaps.

But no group of people were considered "fighters" in any part of history.
Kineon_War
12-27-07, 02:00 AM You're just mincing words because you hate ninjas. :D

Many class names just refer to roles, so your ninja argument hold no water.

You could say the same thing about pirate, assassin, spy, thief, noble, commoner, nomad, scout, knight, gladiator, barbarian etc. etc.

"Fighter" isn't a historical archetype. It's a D&D archetype. There has never been anyone in history that has identified themselves as a "fighter". Warrior, certainly. Knight, but of course. Myrmidon, perhaps.

But no group of people were considered "fighters" in any part of history.
Count Arioch the 28th
12-27-07, 02:30 AM It is regrettable that you lack the imagination to see that you don't have to have the word "ninja" to be written on your character sheet to be a ninja.
heretic888
12-27-07, 08:43 AM I still think a Ninjitsu martial art is the answer to this.

Hi Kineon_War,

In all seriousness, you can do a decent job constructing many of the core principles of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D through the Tome of Battle. A judicious selection of Diamond Mind, Setting Sun, Shadow Hand, and perhaps one or two Desert Wind maneuvers will more than replicate what you're looking for.

I also agree with Count Arioch the 28th that you don't *need* the word "ninja" plastered on your character sheet to either a) roleplay one or b) replicate the concepts of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D.

Its nice to have one, though, which is why I am currently working on my Shinobi class and Hidden Door discipline. ;)
Kineon_War
12-28-07, 07:51 AM You're preaching to the converted about there is no need for a "ninja" class.
I usually play with 5 generic classes and build from there.
I still think a Ninpo martial art would be fun to build.

And I still think the same argument that your using against a ninja class could be levelled at other classes.

However, the point of this thread was not to argue pointlessly over the ninja (there are probably other threads for this) but rather to say what you would change about O D & D.

So if you have any ideas I'd be glad to read them.

Hi Kineon_War,

In all seriousness, you can do a decent job constructing many of the core principles of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D through the Tome of Battle. A judicious selection of Diamond Mind, Setting Sun, Shadow Hand, and perhaps one or two Desert Wind maneuvers will more than replicate what you're looking for.

I also agree with Count Arioch the 28th that you don't *need* the word "ninja" plastered on your character sheet to either a) roleplay one or b) replicate the concepts of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D.

Its nice to have one, though, which is why I am currently working on my Shinobi class and Hidden Door discipline. ;)
KLGChaos
12-28-07, 10:00 AM If I could change it, the only thing I would really do is create a more generic Asian-style source book. The current one is based heavily on Rokugan, so it leans heavily towards the Japanese side of things. For someone who is combining elements of Japanese and Chinese cultures (for me it's Rokugan and the world from the Jade Empire video game), it makes it tough when you only really have one side to compare it to. After all, if I wanted to play a Japanese only setting, then I would have just bought the Rokugan source book and wouldn't have bothered with the OA book.

So now I have a book that fleshes various races and classes found in the OA book (Nezumi, Human Clans, Samurai, Shugenja), which is great, but the other races like Korobokuru and Hengeyokai, and classes such as Shaman, Wu Jen and Sohei are given next to nothing to expand upon them (the Sohei have crap in the way of Prestige Class choices without giving up most of their spell-casting ability, while the Samurai and Shugenja have several designed specifically for them throughout both books).

And speaking of Sohei, it mentions in the Rokugan campaign setting book that Monks are so common in Rokugan that they're divided into multiple groups, including the Inkyo and the Sohei. The question is, then, if Sohei's exist in Rokugan, why did they reprint the Samurai and Shugenja, but not the Sohei from the OA book and flesh it out more like they did the other classes?
narukagami
12-28-07, 01:37 PM And speaking of Sohei, it mentions in the Rokugan campaign setting book that Monks are so common in Rokugan that they're divided into multiple groups, including the Inkyo and the Sohei. The question is, then, if Sohei's exist in Rokugan, why did they reprint the Samurai and Shugenja, but not the Sohei from the OA book and flesh it out more like they did the other classes? Because while Sohei exist in Rokugan, the Sohei class presented in OA doesn't.
KLGChaos
12-28-07, 06:20 PM Because while Sohei exist in Rokugan, the Sohei class presented in OA doesn't.

Ah. Then they at least could have given us a variation on them, or told us how they were different, instead of just mentioning them in a small blurb and leaving it at that, like they did with the Inkyo. :P
narukagami
12-28-07, 06:30 PM Ah. Then they at least could have given us a variation on them, or told us how they were different, instead of just mentioning them in a small blurb and leaving it at that, like they did with the Inkyo. :P Agreed. I always assumed they're just Inkyo or Monks with some Fighter levels, but it'd be nice to get a better picture on their concept.
Hochiu
12-29-07, 01:49 AM Actually, its called the Swordsage. Zing! :D

Aaaaactually, since D&D is CORE-only with supplemental material (including The Book of Nine Swords) being under each individual DM's purview to allow or disallow...its still a rogue. Or a fighter. Or a ranger. Or a monk. Or a multiclass Cleric/Rogue. Or a...you get it. KA-POW! :D

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kineon_War 12-25-07, 01:51 AM	I'm currently running an OD & D campaign and have encountered some problems with O D & D. Personally, I thought the first O D & D book was better than the second. I know the martial arts rules were very powerful but still it had more in it. The 3.0 version seemed to be more about selling the L5R game and Rokugan world. (I know the first version focused on Kara-tur but it seemed to have a lot more generally applicable stuff too. Anyway, I thought that I'd start this thread about what you think you'd change about D & D. This is more for lists of changes with possibility of links to other threads where the answer to individual problems has been discussed in more detail. Enjoy...
Kineon_War 12-25-07, 02:05 AM	My List: 1. Both books seemed to focus on Chinese and Japanese culture, with Indian culture thrown in as an after thought. There was nothing about Korea and precious little except lip service to South East Asia. 2. No Ninja class (mentioned by others). 3. Too much promotion of the individual worlds that each book was made to market, not enough about designing your own O D & D worlds. 4. Monster Manuals needed more monsters and more development. 5. No distinction between Japanese and Chinese elements leading to a blur of cultures. 6. In the 3.0 addtion, the martial arts seemed to lack flavour. 7. In the 3.0 edition, most of the non-human races just seemed to be animal-people variations. 8. 3.0 edition had less Asian flavour than the A D & D version. 9. Much of the "Asian" stuff seemed to be more about Western perceptions of Asia rather than actual Asian stuff. (I currently live in South Korea and have travelled the region well). 10. There should be cool Kung-fu stuff like the Book of Nine Swords. 11. There was no "metal" element in the Shukenja spells. 12. there was no Daimyo class or Geisha class. 13. The other problems with the D 20 system are still in it.
Count Arioch the 28th 12-25-07, 10:58 AM	2. No Ninja class (mentioned by others). It's called a Rogue. 12. there was no Daimyo class or Geisha class. Aristocrat and expert, respectively.
narukagami 12-25-07, 01:10 PM	1. Both books seemed to focus on Chinese and Japanese culture, with Indian culture thrown in as an after thought. There was nothing about Korea and precious little except lip service to South East Asia. Its hard to do regions of the world without actually writing about said regions, and if you lurk around you'll notice there seems to be this underlying animosity towards using real world things in game as represented in the real world. So if they did do that people will just complain. But I do agree. 2. No Ninja class (mentioned by others). See Count's response. 3. Too much promotion of the individual worlds that each book was made to market, not enough about designing your own O D & D worlds. Thats the problem with not being enough of a generic toolbox and having a featured campaign setting. At least Kara-tur was more diverse than Rokugan, though. 4. Monster Manuals needed more monsters and more development. Just as long as its not like Green Ronin's "Silliness and Stereotypes".... er... I mean, "Jade Dragons and Hungry Ghosts." 5. No distinction between Japanese and Chinese elements leading to a blur of cultures. Again, Rokugan's fault. 6. In the 3.5 addtion, the martial arts seemed to lack flavour. There is no 3.5 OA book. 7. In the 3. edition, most of the non-human races just seemed to be animal-people variations. Animal people seemed to be a common element in most East Asian myth, there isn't a whole lot else that isn't some kind of evil troublemaker or near godly beast. 8. 3.5 edition had less Asian flavour than the A D & D version. I think you mean 3.0 version, as I said above, there is no 3.5 OA book (though it has been updated using Dragon issue 318). But anyway. Thats Rokugan's fault, again. (Side note: You ever notice that when people are talking about "Asia" they usually just mean "Japan?") 9. Much of the "Asian" stuff seemed to be more about Western perceptions of Asia rather than actual Asian stuff. (I currently live in South Korea and have travelled the region well). Rokugan... again. 10. There should be cool Kung-fu stuff like the Book of Nine Swords. Well, if the 4ed previews are any indication, that won't be a problem. 11. There was no "metal" element in the Wujen spells. Actually there was no mention of the Chinese 5 element style at all, the whole book seemed to be more geared towards the Japanese elemental system: fire, wind, water, earth and void. There was metal, are you sure you're looking at the right book? 12. there was no Daimyo class or Geisha class. Because there shouldn't be. Ever. 13. The other problems with the D 20 system are still in it. Of course they are... because it the d20 system still.
Kineon_War 12-26-07, 01:15 AM	It's called a Rogue. Aristocrat and expert, respectively. Yes, I agree that the Rogue makes an excellent Ninja type but I think that if you added a Ninjitsu martial art, that the rogue could spend feats on to gain other ninja-like powers then that would be really cool. Aristocrat and Expert are NPC classes. I like the Noble from Conan RPG. Basically the Aristocrat plus some feats. Conan RPG also has the Temptress, which is interesting but not quite the Geisha. I read in another forum about modifying a bard and I might give that some thought.
Kineon_War 12-26-07, 01:29 AM	Thank you for drawing my attention to the 3.5 typos. I have changed them. There is no 3.5 OA book. snip snip snip I think you mean 3.0 version, as I said above, there is no 3.5 OA book (though it has been updated using Dragon issue 318). But anyway. Thats Rokugan's fault, again. (Side note: You ever notice that when people are talking about "Asia" they usually just mean "Japan?")
Kineon_War 12-26-07, 01:36 AM	Doh! The Shukenja does not have metal. The Wujen does. There was metal, are you sure you're looking at the right book?
Kineon_War 12-26-07, 01:50 AM	So do either of you have any ideas about what you would change in O D & D?
narukagami 12-26-07, 01:50 AM	Doh! The Shukenja does not have metal. The Wujen does. Ah, I see. The OA shugenja only has the Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Void style element list because its a d20 version of the Legend of the Five Rings shugenja. Its limited to that element style because those are the L5R elements. The shugenja is quite the oddity if you ask me. It has little to nothing to do with the "shugenja" of Japanese origin. The OA shaman class is probably a lot closer, really. I honestly think when the L5R writers cooked up this concept of an elementalist spellcaster for their world and wanted to tack a Japanese name to it, they just looked up terms associated with magic users in Japanese culture. They couldn't just use the Japanese words for "magic user" because they already associated "maho tsukai" with evil blood magic (probably another decision made at random), so they were left with "Shugenja" and "Onmyoji" and probably flipped a coin...
Kineon_War 12-26-07, 01:53 AM	Yes, I agree with your assessment of the shukenja. The shaman is much more like the Shukenja should be. I think the shaman should be changed as well. Ah, I see. The OA shugenja only has the Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Void style element list because its a d20 version of the Legend of the Five Rings shugenja. Its limited to that element style because those are the L5R elements. The shugenja is quite the oddity if you ask me. It has little to nothing to do with the "shugenja" of Japanese origin. The OA shaman class is probably a lot closer, really. I honestly think when the L5R writers cooked up this concept of an elementalist spellcaster for their world and wanted to tack a Japanese name to it, they couldn't just use the Japanese words for "magic user" because they already associated "maho tsukai" with evil blood magic (probably another decision made at random), so they were left with "Shugenja" and "Onmyoji" and probably flipped a coin...
narukagami 12-26-07, 01:56 AM	So do either of you have any ideas about what you would change in O D & D? I would also suggest different subsections on things derived from different cultures, mainly for organization and convenience if anything. Probably another section on adopting occidental D&D stuff into an OA campaign... Also, at least a blurb explaining the difference between historical accuracy and cultural authenticity. :P
narukagami 12-26-07, 02:00 AM	OH, on the subject of martial arts, more styles involving weapons and maybe specialty paths for all classes. (Caster-fu, anyone?)
heretic888 12-26-07, 11:46 PM	It's called a Rogue. Actually, its called the Swordsage. Zing! :D
Count Arioch the 28th 12-27-07, 12:17 AM	Actually, its called the Swordsage. Zing! :D Either way, I think we can agree that you can be a "ninja" without having the word "ninja" written on your character sheet.
Kineon_War 12-27-07, 12:50 AM	Either way, I think we can agree that you can be a "ninja" without having the word "ninja" written on your character sheet. You can do that with many classes though: Assassin = anyone who gets paid to kill things. etc. Can a wizard who gets into fights, call themselves a fighter? I still think a Ninjitsu martial art is the answer to this.
Count Arioch the 28th 12-27-07, 01:23 AM	Can a wizard who gets into fights, call themselves a fighter? "Fighter" isn't a historical archetype. It's a D&D archetype. There has never been anyone in history that has identified themselves as a "fighter". Warrior, certainly. Knight, but of course. Myrmidon, perhaps. But no group of people were considered "fighters" in any part of history.
Kineon_War 12-27-07, 02:00 AM	You're just mincing words because you hate ninjas. :D Many class names just refer to roles, so your ninja argument hold no water. You could say the same thing about pirate, assassin, spy, thief, noble, commoner, nomad, scout, knight, gladiator, barbarian etc. etc. "Fighter" isn't a historical archetype. It's a D&D archetype. There has never been anyone in history that has identified themselves as a "fighter". Warrior, certainly. Knight, but of course. Myrmidon, perhaps. But no group of people were considered "fighters" in any part of history.
Count Arioch the 28th 12-27-07, 02:30 AM	It is regrettable that you lack the imagination to see that you don't have to have the word "ninja" to be written on your character sheet to be a ninja.
heretic888 12-27-07, 08:43 AM	I still think a Ninjitsu martial art is the answer to this. Hi Kineon_War, In all seriousness, you can do a decent job constructing many of the core principles of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D through the Tome of Battle. A judicious selection of Diamond Mind, Setting Sun, Shadow Hand, and perhaps one or two Desert Wind maneuvers will more than replicate what you're looking for. I also agree with Count Arioch the 28th that you don't need the word "ninja" plastered on your character sheet to either a) roleplay one or b) replicate the concepts of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D. Its nice to have one, though, which is why I am currently working on my Shinobi class and Hidden Door discipline. ;)
Kineon_War 12-28-07, 07:51 AM	You're preaching to the converted about there is no need for a "ninja" class. I usually play with 5 generic classes and build from there. I still think a Ninpo martial art would be fun to build. And I still think the same argument that your using against a ninja class could be levelled at other classes. However, the point of this thread was not to argue pointlessly over the ninja (there are probably other threads for this) but rather to say what you would change about O D & D. So if you have any ideas I'd be glad to read them. Hi Kineon_War, In all seriousness, you can do a decent job constructing many of the core principles of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D through the Tome of Battle. A judicious selection of Diamond Mind, Setting Sun, Shadow Hand, and perhaps one or two Desert Wind maneuvers will more than replicate what you're looking for. I also agree with Count Arioch the 28th that you don't need the word "ninja" plastered on your character sheet to either a) roleplay one or b) replicate the concepts of Ninpo Taijutsu in D&D. Its nice to have one, though, which is why I am currently working on my Shinobi class and Hidden Door discipline. ;)
KLGChaos 12-28-07, 10:00 AM	If I could change it, the only thing I would really do is create a more generic Asian-style source book. The current one is based heavily on Rokugan, so it leans heavily towards the Japanese side of things. For someone who is combining elements of Japanese and Chinese cultures (for me it's Rokugan and the world from the Jade Empire video game), it makes it tough when you only really have one side to compare it to. After all, if I wanted to play a Japanese only setting, then I would have just bought the Rokugan source book and wouldn't have bothered with the OA book. So now I have a book that fleshes various races and classes found in the OA book (Nezumi, Human Clans, Samurai, Shugenja), which is great, but the other races like Korobokuru and Hengeyokai, and classes such as Shaman, Wu Jen and Sohei are given next to nothing to expand upon them (the Sohei have crap in the way of Prestige Class choices without giving up most of their spell-casting ability, while the Samurai and Shugenja have several designed specifically for them throughout both books). And speaking of Sohei, it mentions in the Rokugan campaign setting book that Monks are so common in Rokugan that they're divided into multiple groups, including the Inkyo and the Sohei. The question is, then, if Sohei's exist in Rokugan, why did they reprint the Samurai and Shugenja, but not the Sohei from the OA book and flesh it out more like they did the other classes?
narukagami 12-28-07, 01:37 PM	And speaking of Sohei, it mentions in the Rokugan campaign setting book that Monks are so common in Rokugan that they're divided into multiple groups, including the Inkyo and the Sohei. The question is, then, if Sohei's exist in Rokugan, why did they reprint the Samurai and Shugenja, but not the Sohei from the OA book and flesh it out more like they did the other classes? Because while Sohei exist in Rokugan, the Sohei class presented in OA doesn't.
KLGChaos 12-28-07, 06:20 PM	Because while Sohei exist in Rokugan, the Sohei class presented in OA doesn't. Ah. Then they at least could have given us a variation on them, or told us how they were different, instead of just mentioning them in a small blurb and leaving it at that, like they did with the Inkyo. :P
narukagami 12-28-07, 06:30 PM	Ah. Then they at least could have given us a variation on them, or told us how they were different, instead of just mentioning them in a small blurb and leaving it at that, like they did with the Inkyo. :P Agreed. I always assumed they're just Inkyo or Monks with some Fighter levels, but it'd be nice to get a better picture on their concept.
Hochiu 12-29-07, 01:49 AM	Actually, its called the Swordsage. Zing! :D Aaaaactually, since D&D is CORE-only with supplemental material (including The Book of Nine Swords) being under each individual DM's purview to allow or disallow...its still a rogue. Or a fighter. Or a ranger. Or a monk. Or a multiclass Cleric/Rogue. Or a...you get it. KA-POW! :D