4e is nice in that you can simply add builds to existing classes to tweek the feel and flavor a bit. however there are times that a build is not enough and a new class is needed to create what feels right for the character. I'd like to work on figuring out what people agree on for 4e classes. What Iconic powers do the OA classes have that would need to be created to make a person feel they were truly playing the OA version and not the western?
No chances needed?
Fighter / Bushi
Monk
Barbarian
Ranger (Though maybe a great class for Demon Hunter builds and Paragons)
Shaman (Maybe only use a multiclass or hybrid Monk build for martial arts options?)
Sorcerer
The following classes I'd like to make updates either with a Build or a new class.
What is needed to fully give the player good options to make them feel they are playing said class?
Samaria
This class could be the trickiest. Defender? Striker? Str or Dex? There are so many ways people see this class that I feel it could be turned into it's own class vs making only a fighter build for example.
I tend to lean towards str and Defender for this class. However I can very easily see dex and striker traits as well. Thoughts?
For This class and possibly others I was wondering about creating a KI Source. I know WoTC dropped it and switched the Monk to Psi. My proposal would be this. KI is a combination of Martial and Psi sources. Those who train in this source use mostly martial trianing but they study and focus so greatly that they often unlock and acheive powers that are truly psionic without understanding this power sources true nature.
Samaria Iconic powers
Katana - maybe just a Bastard Sword by rules but they should start with this weapon without the need of a feat.
Iaijutsu - An idea I had here was to go with Defender as the role but offer a week striker power. Kinda the opposite of how people talk of the avenger having a defenderish power. My idea here was that once per encounter as you draw your Katana you may add bonus damage to the attack. Possibly 1d6 / 2d6 / 3d6. Again it would be usable only once per encounter.
Far more to come I hope.
Ninja
I've not seen the Assassin class can this be come a build for this class?
Sohie
I've always loved this class and would like to really do it justice in 4e. Their Ki Frenzy reminds me ofthe Monks flurry of blows. However much of this classes feel is Defender based. Ideas?
Yakuza
Basically a rogue. Any changes needed here?
Wu Jen
Possibly wait to see the elemental classes? Clearly a Controller
Shukenja
I grabbed the wrong book to review this class. Surely a Healer. Where could this fit in?
Wow I've used up far more time than I expected for typing so little. I'll try to keep adding stuff and I'd love to here from any interested in creating 4e OA options.
Sohei were a divine class, so I'd let most any divine character call themselves one.
Wu Jen is a Wizard; they even had spellbooks in 3e.
Shugenja was a weird class in general; what element they chose (and by extension, the one they couldn't ever use) affected their role significantly. No Water access, no healing, for example; this would be another case for 'call yourself a shugenja, mechanically be almost anything'.
Samurai could be a fighter, your build would be dependant on your clan/house/region or whatever (like if you wanted to use L5R).
I would say keep the monk as is, just reflavor to have a bit of a martial feel to it to combine with the Psi aspect of the class if you wanted.
For a ninja, a rogue, archer ranger (with the right skill trainings), or assassin would work.
I agree that any divine class could be a Sohei, but maybe make the different divine classes be different Sohei schooling.
Wu Jen is undoubtly a wizard as Salla already mentioned.
The Shugenja class is a tricky one. I would say take four classes and base them around the elements. For example you could use a Warlock or Sorcerer for Fire, and a Shaman for Water just for example.
I just don't see why everyone thinks that you need new classes when flavor and some general tweaking of existing classes would work.
A significant portion of the time, it's because the creator is a Japan/anime fanboy and believes that such things must be more powerful than their 'Western' equivalents.
I just don't see why everyone thinks that you need new classes when flavor and some general tweaking of existing classes would work.
A significant portion of the time, it's because the creator is a Japan/anime fanboy and believes that such things must be more powerful than their 'Western' equivalents.
That's it. I'm sick of all this "bastard sword" crap that's going on in the 4th Edition system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the 4th Edition system. Here is the stat block I propose for katanas:
(Superior One-Handed Melee Weapon)
2d10 base damage
+5 proficiency bonus
Heavy blade, light blade (counts as both)
High crit, off-hand, reach, versatile
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in 4th Edition, see my new stat block.
I'll be the first to point out that the Katana is a whole other beastie compared to the western bastard swords, the use of bastard sword stats for the katana in 3rd edition is largely due to the hand-and-a-half nature of both blades. I.e. both can be used efficiently in one or both hands, at least according to cinema.
Now if we are to do a setting with samurai I agree that a different weapon should be used, however that monster you posted is by far too unbalanced.
Superior, One-handed, Versatile, +3 Proficiency bonus, d10, heavy blade
So:
Superior, Two-handed, High Crit, +3 Prof, d10, heavy blade.
There should be style feat, or a school feat or something to allow you treat it as a versatile blade or at least one handed.
Also, the Katana was made because of a lack of good iron and steel in Japan, and the lack of European armor. European weapons after a time relied on concussive force to damage thier enemies, because of the plate and the abundance of metal. Quite frankly, a Katana (made with the best steel in modern times), with a trained master could easily take on a knight in full plate. Though most likely, a good samurai would have just shot the tin man down with an arrow.
Anyway, the only two classes that need any real re-inventing are the Sohei and the Shugenja. It's a pity that Divine doesn't actually cover more eastern dieties, as that's represented by Primal. It would have been a more defining characteristic for the Sohei if they were primal, but did not suscribe to the same DnD gods or practices. Avengers could make decent Sohei, probably a build needed... The last is the Shugenja. Seriously, toss out the divine hold over, and just make it elemental or psionic or at least more interesting. Look at the Avatar: Elemental Heroes thread, and see what you think.
Ok cool your jets rouroni wannabe.
>He doesn't know it's copypasta.
Is it cloned spaghetti?
I don't know what copypasta is either.
Is it cloned spaghetti?
It was sarcasm. He was copying and pasting ('copy-pasta') something, in this case, it seems, an actual post from a Japanese fanboi.
Irrelevant tacked-on line: As far as I'm concerned, katana=longsword.
The Katana, if anything, is really a 2 handed sword. Most Styles always go for the two handed approach, with the right hand for power, and the left for control. It should have high crit instead.
(Talking from experience only in kendo)
Its left for power, right for control. its all about the slashing, never about force
I would suggest a superiour weapon, prof +4, 1d8 damage, versitile
(OMG a +4 proficiency weapon, the horror!)
The Katana, if anything, is really a 2 handed sword. Most Styles always go for the two handed approach, with the right hand for power, and the left for control. It should have high crit instead.
(Talking from experience only in kendo)
Its left for power, right for control. its all about the slashing, never about force
I would suggest a superiour weapon, prof +4, 1d8 damage, versitile
(OMG a +4 proficiency weapon, the horror!)
Why exactly would it have +4 prof? That's ridiculously accurate, and for, honestly, no reason.
I don't understand why everyone seems to think katanas should be a supirior weapon. They are a sword, and not even a special sword. Bastard Swords are supirior because they are huge. Katanas are a small sword. They aren't exotic like a katar or a spiked chain.
I'd say just use a longsword. They are pretty much a Japanese longsword.
Heavy crit for those oh so cinematic beheadings.
Would definitely be cool to see 4e OA setting and support - I'm sure some third party company has already done it or at least started.
The class reflavoring suggestions are great for now - simple, elegant, and capture the feel and theme.
And a kitana could easily be anything as good or better than a longsword in 4e - well, except the fullblade. That thing is just terrifyingly huge and heavy, and not a very Oriental-flavored seeming sword.
Also, the whole reason the bastard sword is a superior weapons is the same that a Katana would be a superior weapon. The proposed properties really make it so. Not to mention that a Katana would be useless if used like a longsword. It's a slashing and stabbing two-handed sword. It's not even Versatile in the game meaning, and so forth. Also, bastard swords are called bastard swords I though due to the one and half hand hilts which alllowed the sword to be a good slashing and stabbing weapon; not because they're huge. Really, though if you want to run/convert OA to 4e, I think doing a good conversion of an iconic weapon would be good.
Like I said, why bother with iconic weapons, when simpler weapons would just fine? But no.... we have the Double Scimitar, which really is a Double Sword.. and so on.
Sorry if this has been posted before, but if it was, I did not see it.
In my campaign, the dragonborn come from a continent to the south that was (back in 3.x), an unkown land, an idea I was toying with that there was a continent ruled by dragons in which the primary humanoid inhabitants were mostly draconic or half-dragon, and dragons ruled. This continent is now connected to the primary landmass in which I run my campaigns, but remains fairly mysterious (as of now, any dragonborn players in my campaign are decended from dragonborn who emigrated north over a century before.
Dragonborn concepts of honor lend to a very bushido-like outlook, and, wanting to emphasize the difference, I wanted everything in thi continent to look and feel a lot different. So, I decided, what if the land were Oriental-themed and the dragons ruled as daimyos over the dragonborn populace?
Just as a flavor thing, I don't intend on making a whole new list of weapons and armor, but I was looking at past Oriental campaign sources and was doing conversions for items and wanted to post them here for people who might want something similar.
Anyone else who would like to contribute is welcome to do so, I will update the lsit on the OP whenever I get the chance.
[u]Armor[/u]
Cloth: No change (Cord Armor?)
Leather: Ashigaru Armor, Bone Armor, (Cord Armor?)
Hide: Leather Scale, Dhenuka Chainmail: Brigandine Armor, Partial Armor
Scale: Lamellar
Plate: Great Armor (O-yoroi)
[u]Weapons:[/u]
Dagger: Tanto, Aiguchi, Tamo Daggers
Short Sword: Ninja-to, Butterfly Sword, Wakizashi(restricted to nobility)
Bastard Sword: Katana
Greatsword: No-dachi
Falchion: Nagamaki, Ba Gua Dao
Maul: Die Tsuchi
Greatclub: Tetsubo
Greataxe: Ono
Rapier: Tai Chi Sword (scholar's sword)
Scimitar: Dao
Longspear: Yari
Spear/Javelin: Nage-yari
Quarterstaff: Bo
Club: Jo
Glaive: Naginata
Halberd: Kwan Dao
Parrying Dagger: Sai, Jitte
Sickle: Kama
[u]New Weapons[/u]
Tonfa: Same stats as club, add Defensive and Off-Hand properties.; Military Weapon.
Nunchaku: Military Weapon; +2 Prof.; 1d6 damage; Mace, Flail, Off-Hand Versatile properties. Kusari-Gama: Superior, 2h Double Weapon; +2 Prof.; 1d6/1d6 damage; Light Blade, Flail, Off-Hand, Reach properties. Any additional items, as well as additions to the ones I have already posted are welcome!
My 2 coppers, take them as you will.
Why exactly would it have +4 prof? That's ridiculously accurate, and for, honestly, no reason.
I don't understand why everyone seems to think katanas should be a supirior weapon. They are a sword, and not even a special sword. Bastard Swords are supirior because they are huge. Katanas are a small sword. They aren't exotic like a katar or a spiked chain.
I'd say just use a longsword. They are pretty much a Japanese longsword.
because of the nature of the sword. a katana is as much as a longsword as a rapier is a longsword.
In practice, using a longsword, you use powerfull cutting blows and piercing blows. You could slash with it, but in practice you cut your opponent and slash your sword free. in other words the most damage comes from the initial cut, while the slash does nearly nothing.
With a katana (again - I only know the form thought in kendo), you slash your opponent a hit using the force of the wrists, and slash though.
They are a sword, and not even a special sword.
The katana has a legendairy status amongst weapons (diserved or not), so in a fantasy game, is it not logical that they are superior?
IIRC a mordenkrad is a maul with pins. Does it mather if in reality that makes them worse or better?
Especially in an Oriental adventures game: in Japan, european longswords were considered to be inferiour to katana's. so katana's being a superiour longsword? makes total sense
It's not even Versatile in the game meaning
I disagree. Katate-men, katate-kote, niten ichi-ryuu, iaiutsu ... its not that uncommon to attack with a katana while using only one hand.
And again, in popular culture, katana's are wielded one-handed...
Katana - lots of good ideas. this one has always left people divided. Maybe the same stats as a bastard sword is the best starter and then have feats that allow for school variance .
I do like the idea of making it a two-weapon sword. I had a crazy idea of making it +3 d12 "balanced" This weapon is designed to be used two-handed and is most effective this way. However it's superior craftsmanship allows it to be wielded one-handed. When using it one handed the stats are reduced to +2 and d10.
again just a thought to ponder.
The Wakizashi seems so similar to the katana that I would like to make it a smaller superior weapon rather than military. Superior in many ways helps to express the quality and cost as well as stats. Is there a way to make better than the short sword without making it better than the rapier? +3 prof, 1d8, off-hand is already better.
Question for those that know. Wakizashi = Versatile? seems I can hold it two-handed?
Wish I had more time. Keep the ideas coming with weapons and build and i'll try more again soon. thanks
Niten "Two Swords Falling From Heaven"" style, developed my Musashi, was the style of fighting with katana and wakizashi. It was considered very unorthodox.
Most wielders used a katana two-handed, although it was small enough to be wielded 1 handed.
This was why the 3e mechanics for katana were so perfect. Since it was essentially a Bastard Sword mechanically, it was an exotic 1 handed weapon, but could be used two-handed as a Martial one. Samurai did not recieve proficiency in the katana, but they were proficient in all martil weapons, so they could wield it 2 handed without penalty.
There was a feat in 3e Rokugan (L5R) for bushi of the Dragon Clan, who fought using Niten style. It counted as Weapon Prof. (Bastard Sword, Ambidexterity, and Two-Weapon Fighting only for purposes of fighting with Katana in one hand Wakizashi in the other.
I do like the idea of making it a two-weapon sword. I had a crazy idea of making it +3 d12 "balanced" This weapon is designed to be used two-handed and is most effective this way. However it's superior craftsmanship allows it to be wielded one-handed. When using it one handed the stats are reduced to +2 and d10.
very good idea. unique & balanced. I like it.
The Wakizashi seems so similar to the katana that I would like to make it a smaller superior weapon rather than military. Superior in many ways helps to express the quality and cost as well as stats. Is there a way to make better than the short sword without making it better than the rapier? +3 prof, 1d8, off-hand is already better.
a keyword?
but I think:
- tanto = dagger
- wakasashi = supperiour dagger (equivalent with short sword)
- kodachi = somewhat between short and longsword
- katana = bteween longsword and twohander
Question for those that know. Wakizashi = Versatile? seems I can hold it two-handed?
I woudn't do that. the kodachi (the off hand sword in kendo's kata 8, 9 and 10) isn't used two handed, and the wakasashi is usually even shorter. With an average of 50cm (20in), the wakizashi is considered a companion sword to the katana.
looking at it, I don't see how you could wield it two handed
Anyone else like the idea? Or should we keep it a bastard sword with maybe samaria weapon talents to improve it?
Chiba_Monkey
Thanks for the info.
I was looking at a cheap blade I had when I asked about it being two handed. seems the hilt was very long on that one. However when I looked at the better made Wakizashi I agree it's clearly one handed only.
Sticking with Samaria questions
I like to create new stuff but 4e makes that really hard. Part of me wants to make this a whole new class with lots of builds representing different schools. Trouble is much of the class would be very similar to the fighter. Is there a way to make a fighter build that provided enough?
Trade Fighter Weapon Talent for gaining the Katana as a weapon and maybe a bit more to flavor things? Or is that already too much? Could the Samaria package force the player to use the first feat as an additional payment for the benefits?
Part of me wants to make this a whole new class with lots of builds representing different schools.
Again, this is solved very easily by letting someone be whatever class they want and simply have Samurai (and it's spelled SAMURAI, btw, not Samaria) be a title. There's no reason to re-invent the wheel.
It's a lot better to make Samurai either a title or a Multi-class feat progression. I'd suggest a multi-class feat progression for various styles or schools. Then maybe paragon paths to completely flesh out the clans, styles, schools, whatever. While I don't completely agree with Salla, it's much better to do it that way with specific feat progressions, and Paragon paths, than making a completely new class that is better represented with current base classes. So you can have a musashi style samurai with the two blade as a ranger, but have weapon or style feats that emulate the style you want with it.
Thanks for the spelling correction. I should have looked again. I'm normally complaining that Sorcerer isn't spelled with an o.
Ceiling90
The Ranger thought and the reverse Versitile idea kinda is why I dropped the dmg as well as the Prof. Perhaps it is too much or perhaps there could be another feat that allowed for better one handed use.
Both of you and Samuria title
This makes sense because I do like the archery and TWF of the ranger for some options.
Well I'm heading out of two for the weekend. I'll see what I can dream up for when I return.
Had I gone with a fighter build for the Samuria I was wondering if 4e standards would except a build that removed shield use as part of the package? It seems most builds don't mess with certain parts of the class. Can anyone see this as being an option for build building? just curious as a side question.
I'd love to see the Duelist Rogue and get ideas on how to build a feat path that does what we want.
2-Weapon Ranger builds work well, as do Tempest Fighter Builds, for Niten style Samurai.
Great Weapon Fighter builds work for more traditional Samurai fighting styles, and keeps the Samurai in line with your view as a defender.
A Warlord build could work, and taking some pages out of Martial power 2, you could develop a warlord build that perhaps sacrifices proficiency with shields for something else. Better armor proficiency, perhaps?
And, of course, the Samurai could be an archer. While Archer Ranger builds would be fine, it still puts the samurai in hide armor, something I don't personally agree with. HOWEVER, I think the Archer Warlord from Martial Power 2 is perfect. He gets better armor, no shields, uses a bow, and is still STR based.
It could be:
Katana: Superior Two-handed Melee Weapon
+3 Prof
1d10 damage
Price: ?
Weight: 8lb
Heavy Blade
Properties: High Crit, Balanced
New Property: Balanced
This property allows the wielder to use the weapon with one hand, but in doing so, the weapon only has +2 proficiency bonus.
I really like the property you were thinking about. And this is much like a Bastard Sword.. only backwards? It really make the weapon stand out more; though I'm not sure it's better than a Bastard Sword either. It's quite difficult to make it like the 3e counterpart, since there's no real penalties for using a weapon you're not proficient with, you just don't gain bonuses. The closest thing I can think of that, since you gotta spend a feat is use a great sword, then make a Greatsword training feat that allows for one handed usage and the High Crit property. But I'd really rather have it as it's own weapon.
Also, as for the lack of.. starting with it, you could always allow it as background perk for being a Samurai background. The prof with a katana.
What types of styles and schools do you think you want to have in the conversion, or rendition, or whatever, that base class builds don't already have? There has to be a few.
Samurai as a title not a build or class. Yeah I see what everyone is saying. I think that's best. Applying the Katana to a background seems like a good idea but those only add a +2 to Skills. Not sure it's a fair/balanced option. I suppose still making chars buy the Superior weapon feat would work. If they want to play a Samurai then the feat could represent a cost to gain their noble heritage. It also represents the additional training they have. It's still a choice to the player to build a char around the katana or another weapon.
Schools
Crab = Fighter
Crane = ?
Dragon = Tempest or TWF Ranger
Lion = Warlord
Phoenix = ?
Scorpion = ?
Unicorn = Warlord Archer or Ranger Archer
Not sure how to cover some of the more dexterous schools. Could you build a Samurai from a rogue?
I'd like to have an option for the Iaijutsu concept. Any thoughts for early level stuff or build this into a paragon?
What are the 'schools' supposed to be? Is it a limitation? Can Crabs only be fighters, Lions only be Warlords?
Look at... Wind Rise Ports background feature, I mean the background can do a little more than just +2 to skills. But, it would be alright to have the Feat as an investment to being a "real" samurai in the setting. The other swords are just katana shaped longswords. Or something. Which I think is fitting.
I also don't remember what Iajutsu does...
The clans are clans of Samurai that like to embody some form of fighthing style, I thought... It's been a long while since I've read 3e OA. Or at least have some type of traditional something or another.
Look at... Wind Rise Ports background feature, I mean the background can do a little more than just +2 to skills. But, it would be alright to have the Feat as an investment to being a "real" samurai in the setting. The other swords are just katana shaped longswords. Or something. Which I think is fitting.
I also don't remember what Iajutsu does...
Yes, but I was wondering what the implementation was going to be. I certainly can't see saying 'You're from clan X, you must be class X' as contributing anything to a game.
Iajutsu was a pretty broken mechanic wherein you got a ludicrious amount of bonus damage, based on a skill check, against a flat-footed opponent. It's definitely best tossed into the dustbin of the past and forgotten.
The clans and the styles, I was thinking would be more like weapon multi-class feats, with maybe changes to how you wielded a katana...
Take for and idea, the Musashi Tempest Style or something:
The first feat would allow the prof with a Katana, and maybe using it one handed withouth losing the extra proficiency bonus. Then the next feat would allow Tempest Strike, and so forth.
Or if a Clan really favored the Spear, somehow or another you can wield a two handed spear in one hand and the Katana in another. The entire point would be make it that if you actually took clan feats or style feats you would be a more distinct samurai. Well at least, that how I think it would be.
I'd like to to find a 4e version of Iajutsu. Basically it was the skill of killing your opponent as you draw your katana from it's sheath. 3x literally made it a new skill. 4e I'm sure could cover it with powers that balanced to other powers. I kept looking at the Barbarian's rage for ideas. The way they can trade a daily for extra damage seemed fitting. The samurai could have a similar ability that they could only use once per combat when actually drawing the katana. Trouble is using multible classes makes adding things like that a true challange.
Crane's favored wearing lighter armor in favor of mobility. I would shy away from defender classes and have them be some kind of striker.
Phoenix favored use of magic, even among their bushi, who' primary purpose was to defend their shugenja. I think Swordmage would be appropriate.
And Scorpion...I think would be rogue. Even thier bushi favored underhanded tactics.
@ceiling90:
I think a set of Lesser and Greater Style feats to represent each clan's fighting style would be appropriate. Then you could have Greater Style feats that would allow for members of different classes to be samurai of that clan. The Crab one, for exmple, would be for any 2h or versatile weapon, with the restriction that it must be wielded in 2 hands to gain the benefits of the style (as Crab often used weapons other than their daisho, such as a tetsubo or ono).
I would look to Martial Power 2 for guideline as to what is and is not balanced.
Samurai depends on build. There's tempest and great weapon fighter as possibilities, as well as taclord and archerlord. Archerlord is great since many samurai were archers, anyway.
Ninja...well, I could shamelessly plug my ninja class, but truthfully, this also depends on build. If you want martial ninja, rogue is perfect. Take the Alchemist feat and you can make all their tools of the trade (smoke bombs, poisons, etc.) Mystical ninja would be good as assassins.
Sohei always sounded like a cleric or monk, most likely monk.
Shugenja sounds more like a wizard or maybe a sorcerer. Sorcerer appears more feasible as I never pegged shugenja for bookworms, but of course, everything's relative.
Wu jen make me think druids, what with their communion with spirits and deriving their power from nature.
As for iaijutsu, you could tie that to the Bluff skill. Specifically, the feint to gain combat advantage. You could make a feat that could let you draw a weapon and "feint" as a minor action, keying the check off Strength instead of Charisma. You could peg on 1d6 + Strength mod extra damage if the check works (and you hit the next attack you make against the enemy that turn), but I wouldn't scale that damage. Straight extra damage from feats (such as Brutal Accuracy) don't scale, but you'll make your point
1. Formal challenge and acceptance.
2. Both participants render themselves helpless to the other.
3. Roll initiative.
4. The winner gets to make a Coup De Grace against the opponent. If he survives, he can attack back, though without the Coup De Grace.
5. Either stop, or keep swinging, depending on the agreed-upon rules of the duel.
katana: as longsword, but ...
feats (you can only have one style feat per tier):
Niten Ichiryuu [style]: for you katanas have the off hand property
Jodan no gamai [style]: for you katanas deal 1d10 instead of 1d8
Gedan no gamai [style]: for you katanas gain the defensive property
Hasso no gamai [style]: for you katanas gain brutal 2
Waki no gamai [style]: get +1 to attackes with katanas against non-bloodied opponents
Hanzo187 - I seen that class. But I didn't sign up for the site to be able to download it. (If I remember right) It looked very well done and I bet many that find this thread would enjoy reading through it. Myself included since I don't have a link anymore.
Ceiling90 - I wish I had access to DDI. Maybe I should just buy it for a while. Once you have access can you DL the stuff to keep it or do you need to maintain a subscription to veiw older material?
Salla - Ah yes the duels. I had forgotten about those and had been thinking of just having powers that reflected Iaijutsu. Focusing on the duels I start wondering about how the other classes would balance that way. Would you have to play a rogue to be a great Iaijutsu Master then? Would their be a feat tree that allowed you improve your init for just the duels perhaps?
Qube - I think I'm kinda sold on how Ceiling90 and I did the Katana. Still I like the idea of feats that help to improve your skill with it and these ideas look good.
Sohie Build
Yes they were Divine in OA but I agree that the Monk seems pretty useful for them. Who thinks they should be done like Samurai and just be a title and who thinks it would be nice to see a build that gave them something distict?
Salla - Ah yes the duels. I had forgotten about those and had been thinking of just having powers that reflected Iaijutsu. Focusing on the duels I start wondering about how the other classes would balance that way. Would you have to play a rogue to be a great Iaijutsu Master then? Would their be a feat tree that allowed you improve your init for just the duels perhaps?
Why would you have to be a rogue for that? Anybody can take Improved Initiative.
Salla - Ah yes the duels. I had forgotten about those and had been thinking of just having powers that reflected Iaijutsu. Focusing on the duels I start wondering about how the other classes would balance that way. Would you have to play a rogue to be a great Iaijutsu Master then? Would their be a feat tree that allowed you improve your init for just the duels perhaps?
Why would you have to be a rogue for that? Anybody can take Improved Initiative.
IMO, avengers (persuit) seem to be the ideal duelest. Alot of their powers are "you and me, let's take this outside".
Hanzo187 - I seen that class. But I didn't sign up for the site to be able to download it. (If I remember right) It looked very well done and I bet many that find this thread would enjoy reading through it. Myself included since I don't have a link anymore.
Sure, why not. Here you go:
www.scribd.com/doc/16386782/Dungeons-and...
My only point was that certain classes would certainly have an advantage to other classes.
Yep. Which is why, if you're not one of those classes, when someone challenges you to a duel, you say 'no'.
I was going at it from a combination of game balance and accessibility; every class that I can think of that works for Samurai has proficiency with military melee weapons, which makes the longsword the obvious choice.
But if it just uses the longsword stats, it won't be arbitrarily of supirior quality to other weapons because it comes from a country that isn't in the D&D world! That's absolutly unacceptable! The known consensus is that the Katana is a weapon where each and every sword MUST be of super-high quality, and is always better than other similar weapons!
Seriously though, I don't understand why everyone ALWAYS stats up the katana as being "A longsword, but it's SUPER HIGH QUALITY, and therefore has better stats!"
I was going at it from a combination of game balance and accessibility; every class that I can think of that works for Samurai has proficiency with military melee weapons, which makes the longsword the obvious choice.
But if it just uses the longsword stats, it won't be arbitrarily of supirior quality to other weapons because it comes from a country that isn't in the D&D world! That's absolutly unacceptable! The known consensus is that the Katana is a weapon where each and every sword MUST be of super-high quality, and is always better than other similar weapons!
Seriously though, I don't understand why everyone ALWAYS stats up the katana as being "A longsword, but it's SUPER HIGH QUALITY, and therefore has better stats!"
Because fanboys suck.
I'm sure we were focused on the best stats for the weapon itself not the person using it. We were just trying to be creative and make something that was different. As for your idea of keeping it a light blade that seems troublesome to me. That would make it a very powerful light blade and rogues would never use anything else again. Stat wise the very fact that it weights more than 3 pounds like puts it beyond the realm of light blades for DnD stats. Also I fear giving it a +4 total to hit makes it a bit stronger than anything else too.
The problem here is also that, really, much like a suit of armor, a Katana is an expensive thing to have; they were better than a standard longsword, much like soldier armor for those who weren't knights in Europe was more less a piece of leather and a bit of good luck. So I figure it's a superior weapon, with cost, care, and actual training to use. Sure there were a lot of ornamental katana, as there were a lot ornamental samurai too. The damned icon should have it's take and stats, that isn't found so far in any of the other books. It's bloody icon to the setting. It should have it's own stats. And as I mentioned earlier, people could have katana shaped longswords, but they aren't really samurai or real Katana in the setting, while a true samurai would have one. Especially if you played on the whole Samurai and Soul of the Sword ideal. I hate that you have to pretty bash the Katana, when there are just as many strange idiosyncrancies for other cliche things the most like no one would even bat an eye at, cause it's considered DnD standard. I don't get it. Be hateful.
But if it just uses the longsword stats, it won't be arbitrarily of supirior quality to other weapons because it comes from a country that isn't in the D&D world! That's absolutly unacceptable! The known consensus is that the Katana is a weapon where each and every sword MUST be of super-high quality, and is always better than other similar weapons!
Seriously though, I don't understand why everyone ALWAYS stats up the katana as being "A longsword, but it's SUPER HIGH QUALITY, and therefore has better stats!"
It has nothing to do with fanboyism. Using RL historical references, the katana IS a superior blade. Katanas were made with expert craftsmanship, and each one was tested, and if found to be of anything but exceptional quality, it was discarded.
Seriously. The katana is one of the reasons the whole Knight vs. Samurai thing is moot, even from a hypothetical angle. The Europeans designed armor to defeat weapons, the Japanese designed weapons to defeat armor.
Now, for game balance issues, I usually advocate putting it in line with other Superior weapons, which is why I usually make it a bastard sword. The way the bastard sword worked in 3.x was perfect for the katana, because fighters, rangers, samurai (from OA or Rokugan), etc. could wield it 2-handed (the way most people used it) with no extra effort, but using it one-handed required special training (reflected in spending the proficiency feat).
So while I think it's quality SHOULD reflect stats better than a simple longsword, I'm also not in favor of the ridiculously overpowered stuff. Keep it in line with stuff like the bastard sword and I'm ok with it.
Maybe lower the damage die but make it high crit? So it's like a scimitar, with a higher prof. bonus?
Thast sounds pretty balanced. Superior 1-handed Weapon +3 prof. 1d8 dmg, High Crit, Versatile, Heavy Blade.
What do you guys think?
Or just leave it as a Bastard Sword?
Simple, effective, and minimum of fuss. The weapon names were given more as a representation of the kind of weapon equivalent in your setting than being weapons of specific culture.
ie: since katana are the japenese equivalent of longsword, the blade would be a longsword in your campaign. If you wanted an exceptional version, such as a higher than normal quality blade, you could go bastard sword.
Easy way to handle this. If your katana is 1-handed: go scimitar, longsword, or broadsword. If 2 handed: Go fullblade. If you want 1 or 2 handed: Bastard sword.
Simple, effective, and minimum of fuss. The weapon names were given more as a representation of the kind of weapon equivalent in your setting than being weapons of specific culture.
ie: since katana are the japenese equivalent of longsword, the blade would be a longsword in your campaign. If you wanted an exceptional version, such as a higher than normal quality blade, you could go bastard sword.
Works for me. Pick the class you want and call yourself a samurai, pick the sword you want and call it a katana, then move on.
My take on it seems at least appropriate at giving the Katana a distinctive and assumably balanced approach. The fact that it's a +3 prof already makes a very accurate weapon, and the damage is on par with other two handed weapons that have no extra properties. You have to remember that a drop in proficiency is about a 5% drop in hits, which already drops the damage of the weapon over all. Not even the High Crit property can really make up for the lack of 1 in 20 miss rating versus that of a +3. The Balanced property doesn't quite punish you for using it one handed, after all it's about as good as a broadsword, but it does reward you substatianly for using it two handed.
Yes, it's a mastercraft sword, but so far are presumably Bastard Swords, Spiked Chains, Katars, and other superior weapons.
I like Qube's Idea with different feats to allow more properties on the Katana, but it should be written as Style and Greater Style feats as Chiba mentioned.
Basically, any +3 heavy blade could be considered a katana (or one of its derivatives). Let's look at it like this:
Katana: Longsword
Wakizashi: Short sword
Nodachi: Greatsword
Odachi: Fullblade
Nodachi and Odachi really aren't practical weapons (they were usually placed in shrines), but hey, it's D&D.
As for combat styles, I see no reason for creating a custom style for samurai. The Arkhosian Fang, Hunting Spear, Nerathan High Blade, and Steel Vanguard styles all do the job nicely. Arkhosian Fang and Steel Vanguard are plenty "samurai" as they're precision-oriented.
As for combat styles, I see no reason for creating a custom style for samurai. The Arkhosian Fang, Hunting Spear, Nerathan High Blade, and Steel Vanguard styles all do the job nicely. Arkhosian Fang and Steel Vanguard are plenty "samurai" as they're precision-oriented.
I may have to look more closely at Martial Power 2. I daresay, that's pretty stonkin' brilliant.
It's not even a issue to fanboyism here... If that were the case, why have more weapons outlined in the Adventurer's Vault in the first place. Or even have the new weapons in the Eberron Player's guide. Why bother with all of that in the first place, when quite frankly you could swap out each of those new weapons with a current weapon from the PHB.
Because often those AV weapons are actual usique and different. No one is argueing here that there should be no more weapons made ever for any reason. What's being disputed is the magical super-powers of the katana. It was a sword, guys. Why does it need new stats? It's never been, as far as I know, stated in this thread why the katana requires new stats. Even if we allow ourselves to swallow the "ALWAYS SUPIRIOR QUALITY" thing, then there isn't a reason for it to really even be different than a bastard sword.
The problem here is also that, really, much like a suit of armor, a Katana is an expensive thing to have; they were better than a standard longsword, much like soldier armor for those who weren't knights in Europe was more less a piece of leather and a bit of good luck. So I figure it's a superior weapon, with cost, care, and actual training to use.
You're mistaking "expensive" with "powerful". Katanas were expensive because of the socio-political situation in feudal Japan. Only powerful (status wise, not super-power wise) people were allowed to have a katana. This drove up the value of the item. It's like saying that high quality liquor is better for you than water because the booze is more expensive.
As well, you seem to assume that longswords don't require "actual training to use". I highly doubt that katans honestly had more complicated training REQUIRED than a longsword. Perhaps the people with katanas would be given more ADVANCED training, but to swing the sword was likely not really that hard. It's really just another case of attributing magical propoerties to the katana.
(Side note: Did Japan even have a "normal longsword"? I thought grunts just used spears.)
Sure there were a lot of ornamental katana, as there were a lot ornamental samurai too. The damned icon should have it's take and stats, that isn't found so far in any of the other books. It's bloody icon to the setting. It should have it's own stats. And as I mentioned earlier, people could have katana shaped longswords, but they aren't really samurai or real Katana in the setting, while a true samurai would have one. Especially if you played on the whole Samurai and Soul of the Sword ideal.
While slinging stuff like this that basiclly amounts to "unless katanas have super special stats, they are not REAL katanas because katanas are better! And people using those swords aren't REAL samurai cause they aren't yousing super special katanas!", can you blame people for assumeing some amount of fanboyism?
You keep refering to "The setting". Which setting is this, exactly? The problem we come to if we give katanas super magical properties and assume they are always super high, masterwork quality weapons is that not everyone shares this view. Yes, they can always change it in their home game, but then they'll always have someone whining that those aren't "real" katanas.
What I'm getting at is that not every setting has the concept of Japan (or "the east" as it's usually depicted) having supirior quality weapons because they are just better. Japan also doesn't have a monopoly on the "Soul of the Weapon" concept. I really don't understand why special rules should be made just so people can say in their home game "Japan is better. Look, it says so in the book."
I hate that you have to pretty bash the Katana, when there are just as many strange idiosyncrancies for other cliche things the most like no one would even bat an eye at, cause it's considered DnD standard. I don't get it. Be hateful.
I'm not being "hateful". I'm giving my own opinion. The katana is, in my mind, a sword. I don't attribute magical powers to it, because I really don't buy that it's super awesome just because it's from Japan. I hate to say it, but it smacks heavily of fanboyism when the only reason that's been given for katanas being supirior is that they just were. Why? Why are all Japanese swords just better? I'd really like to hear some actual reasons why.
would still concider at least making a feat to allow it used as a light blade so that rouges can pretend to be ninja still,
Veratile Duelist from Dragon 381. Lets you use one-handed heavy blades with rouge powers that require a light blade.
Though... Didn't ninja use ninjato - a short sword?
As far as classes,
I've seen someone suggest that the Runepriest replaces the Sohei, that its rune states are yin and yang.
Wu Jen just seemed like a Wizard variant to me. Wizard.
Shukenja, I think, will turn up in the Elemental classes if we ever get them. (I hope we do.)
I'm firmly in the "use whatever class(es) you feel best fits your vision of your character" camp for ninja and samurai.
would still concider at least making a feat to allow it used as a light blade so that rouges can pretend to be ninja still,
Veratile Duelist from Dragon 381. Lets you use one-handed heavy blades with rouge powers that require a light blade.
Though... Didn't ninja use ninjato - a short sword?
Correct. The only ninja that ever used a katana (okay, two) is green, has a shell, and lives in the New York City sewers.
It's not even a issue to fanboyism here... If that were the case, why have more weapons outlined in the Adventurer's Vault in the first place. Or even have the new weapons in the Eberron Player's guide. Why bother with all of that in the first place, when quite frankly you could swap out each of those new weapons with a current weapon from the PHB.
Because often those AV weapons are actual usique and different. No one is argueing here that there should be no more weapons made ever for any reason. What's being disputed is the magical super-powers of the katana. It was a sword, guys. Why does it need new stats? It's never been, as far as I know, stated in this thread why the katana requires new stats. Even if we allow ourselves to swallow the "ALWAYS SUPIRIOR QUALITY" thing, then there isn't a reason for it to really even be different than a bastard sword.The problem here is also that, really, much like a suit of armor, a Katana is an expensive thing to have; they were better than a standard longsword, much like soldier armor for those who weren't knights in Europe was more less a piece of leather and a bit of good luck. So I figure it's a superior weapon, with cost, care, and actual training to use.
You're mistaking "expensive" with "powerful". Katanas were expensive because of the socio-political situation in feudal Japan. Only powerful (status wise, not super-power wise) people were allowed to have a katana. This drove up the value of the item. It's like saying that high quality liquor is better for you than water because the booze is more expensive.
As well, you seem to assume that longswords don't require "actual training to use". I highly doubt that katans honestly had more complicated training REQUIRED than a longsword. Perhaps the people with katanas would be given more ADVANCED training, but to swing the sword was likely not really that hard. It's really just another case of attributing magical propoerties to the katana.
(Side note: Did Japan even have a "normal longsword"? I thought grunts just used spears.)Sure there were a lot of ornamental katana, as there were a lot ornamental samurai too. The damned icon should have it's take and stats, that isn't found so far in any of the other books. It's bloody icon to the setting. It should have it's own stats. And as I mentioned earlier, people could have katana shaped longswords, but they aren't really samurai or real Katana in the setting, while a true samurai would have one. Especially if you played on the whole Samurai and Soul of the Sword ideal.
While slinging stuff like this that basiclly amounts to "unless katanas have super special stats, they are not REAL katanas because katanas are better! And people using those swords aren't REAL samurai cause they aren't yousing super special katanas!", can you blame people for assumeing some amount of fanboyism?
You keep refering to "The setting". Which setting is this, exactly? The problem we come to if we give katanas super magical properties and assume they are always super high, masterwork quality weapons is that not everyone shares this view. Yes, they can always change it in their home game, but then they'll always have someone whining that those aren't "real" katanas.
What I'm getting at is that not every setting has the concept of Japan (or "the east" as it's usually depicted) having supirior quality weapons because they are just better. Japan also doesn't have a monopoly on the "Soul of the Weapon" concept. I really don't understand why special rules should be made just so people can say in their home game "Japan is better. Look, it says so in the book."I hate that you have to pretty bash the Katana, when there are just as many strange idiosyncrancies for other cliche things the most like no one would even bat an eye at, cause it's considered DnD standard. I don't get it. Be hateful.
I'm not being "hateful". I'm giving my own opinion. The katana is, in my mind, a sword. I don't attribute magical powers to it, because I really don't buy that it's super awesome just because it's from Japan. I hate to say it, but it smacks heavily of fanboyism when the only reason that's been given for katanas being supirior is that they just were. Why? Why are all Japanese swords just better? I'd really like to hear some actual reasons why.
I don't like the idea that an iconic weapon of Oriental Adventures is simply a longsword. It's about the same idea as the iconic weapon of a arabians nights is a longsword when... we have a statted out scimitar. Why do we have a scimitar? Or a Khopesh? It could have been a longsword. But it's not. I'm not attributing magical powers to it either. Am I? Really? It's still in line with the rest of the presented weapons, I'm not agreeing with a ridiculous +4 to hit, or any crazy ridiculous new property that allows it blow away the Bastard Sword, Fullblade or even Rapier. I rather have a decent take on what could be an unique and ultimately different weapon from a long sword. Yes it's a bloody sword. It's quite different from a longsword, but so is a bastard sword... which is still arguably a longsword. So the point is to make a decent unique weapon choice, that isn't some fanboy wet dream of a Katana, just not a bloody long sword.
Superior in 4e really means it takes more effort to bother with it to kill things. Military means that, as long as you get some formal training in the martial arts, you somehow learn to use those weapons. Simple literally means, you pick up, point and stab/shoot. So a superior weapon means that there is more than what is a standard course in using a weapon, just like a Rapier is superior cause it's not quite a saber, nor is it quite like a dagger. So a Katana, which isn't quite like a longsword and isn't quite like bastard sword, would need more training to learn to use more efficiently than, let's say a longsword. So you have to invest in it. Why is a Fullblade a Superior weapon? Caues it's not quite a greatsword, and not quite... large chunk of metal. You gotta invest in how to use it properly. Also, some folk aren't quite set on it being a bastard sword. Really, a Katana isn't a single handed weapon that people could use two handed. It's more or less a two handed sword, that you can use one handed. There is a distinct difference there.
I just hate this idea that, sure it could be a longsword..so let's leave it that way. But so can be a myriad of other single/double edged swords. I rather have a new weapon that is interesting, but also doesn't have this mystical magical shenanigans that you seem to say that everyone and thier mother gives the Katana. I don't. And I'd like to think that someone would appreciate that my efforts in making a different sword that isn't some super uber sword, but a decently balanced take. Yet, somehow the thought of even attempting such endeavor is already sour in you mouth. Great. Okay, that's fine too.
Really, a Katana isn't a single handed weapon that people could use two handed. It's more or less a two handed sword, that you can use one handed. There is a distinct difference there.
So it's a greatsword if you don't have special training and a bastard sword if you've learned to wield it in one hand.
I'm not really convinced that a property made to replicate that process is really needed.
Also, comparing your version of the katana to existing weapons, it's better than the Talenta Tangat (Ebberon Player's Guide) which is a heavy blade which can be wielded in one or two hands with the high crit property.
I still think Bastard Sword stats work the best short of the fact that a few people liked my idea. It seem hopeless to get a high percentage of people to agree on this topic.
I've also noticed alot of people saying you don't really need to create this or that just use X and Y and be done with it. Is that what 4e has done to the game? 3e everyone had so much fun creating new things. Now it's such a chore people would rather just rename the Sohie and Monk and call it a day. What if we stepped back from the Katana and looked at what things we CAN create not HAVE to?
Kitana
superior Two handed melee weapon
Cost: 50 Gp (or whatever)
Damage: 1D10
Proficient: +3
weight: 5lb
Group:
Heavy blade
High crit
Single hand usable: This weapon may be used in one hand but loses the high crit property when used in this manor.
this is well balenced to current weapons,
gives it the two handed weapon main but usable in one hand feal
Over all I think this should address alll the desires for the weapon yes no?
Stargazer - It took me a moment to realize you were leaving it a military weapon and thats how it was balanced. This idea seems to have merit yet I'm not sure it's right for me. Having a feat that adds Versatile seems kinda week for the feat. maybe not. I suppose this idea goes back to having schools that allowed features to be added to the blade. like school X gives Versatile and school Y gives High Crit.
I still think Bastard Sword stats work the best short of the fact that a few people liked my idea. It seem hopeless to get a high percentage of people to agree on this topic.
I've also noticed alot of people saying you don't really need to create this or that just use X and Y and be done with it. Is that what 4e has done to the game? 3e everyone had so much fun creating new things. Now it's such a chore people would rather just rename the Sohie and Monk and call it a day. What if we stepped back from the Katana and looked at what things we CAN create not HAVE to?
That's what I've felt through this entire thread, is that while sure there are some pick up and place materials and ideas from other books and the like, there is simply no impetus to actually make a new weapon, new style, new anything that is simply much to close but still distinct to what is already printed. Sure, there are styles that are Samurai-y, there are weapons that you could call a Katana; but it seems that no one will approve of an idea that in of itself may work as a standalone. I mean, if this were a setting book, and I only had 2 books, the PHB and this Book, I would want things that presented Samurai Clan Styles, new weapons, and maybe new weapon properties, and maybe even a new class already in the Book, and not have to worry about hunting down Martial Power 2 or even Adventurer's Vault. But... It seems that everyone is completely against that idea. Maybe because it's OA, and there's a huge backlash against the idea because of asian = superior or asian =! DnD mentalities. I don't believe in either of that, and I'd like have newer mundane weapons, more martial styles, hell, even a new class that is arguably a build of an existing class (seriously though, look at some of the phb3 classes and say that isn't Psionic X or a Warlock with a Pact Bow). I'd like to make sure if it were a real Book, to make it worth while. Eberron certainly did that, so why not go as far as you can?
Note: I still support my take on it. The Tangat is on par. Since the point of my version is that it's a two handed weapon, using a tangat two handed basically already ups the die size, to a d10. The lower proficiency is covered by the high crit. The Bastard sword still completely blows the tangat away, since it's decidedly a d12 as a two handed weapon. So the Katana I proposed is a little better than the Tangat, and not better than the Bastard Sword; but you gotta take note, both weapons are default one handed weapons. The Katana should be default to two handed. The Tangat is great for... small sized characters (which I think is a stupid restriction, but I digress), and the Bastard Sword is best dual wield weapon you can get your stinking hands on. It fits somewhere in the middle, so I think it works.
Would something like this work?
Kitana
Two handed melee weapon
Cost: 50 Gp (or whatever)
Damage: 1D10
Proficient: +3
weight: 5lb
Group:
Heavy bladeFeat:
one handed Kitana (or whatever) the kitana gains versatile.
Two handed kitana focus (or whatever) when used with two hands the kitana gains the high crit feature.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Makes it usable by allmost all classes, makes it primarily 2 handed but allows with a feat for it to be one handed, Also added a feat for high crit when used two handed which should be if anything a underpowered feat since there are plenty of weapons that do both more damage and are high crit. with no feat required.
"One-handed katana" is pretty much the same as taking Weapon Prof(Bastard sword), though, isn't it?
I'm really thinking a mutliclass weapon thing is the way to go for the katana. That way, regardless of the marital class you pick, you could still pull off the really cool moves with it.
Katana Training [Multiclass Katana] - You gain proficiency with the katana (default to bastard sword if your DM does not have other stats). When you weild it in two hands, treat it as having the high crit property.
Katana Novice - swap power for Iaijutsu Strike attack power.
Iaijutsu Strike
Encouter * Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Requirement: Your katana must be sheathed.
Target: One creature who has not acted.
Attack: Str vs AC
Hit: 2[W] + Str mod
Special: Before the attack you may shift a number of squares equal to your dex modifier.
Katana Expert - swap power for Deflect Arrow utility power.
Deflect Arrow
Encounter
Immediate Interrupt
Requirement: You must be weilding a katana.
Trigger: You are hit by a ranged attack against your AC.
Effect: Make a melee basic attack roll. If the result is higher than your AC, use it in place of your AC against the triggering attack.
Katana Specialist - someone else come up with this. my creativity is shot.
They need work, but hey, it's a start.
I've also noticed alot of people saying you don't really need to create this or that just use X and Y and be done with it. Is that what 4e has done to the game? 3e everyone had so much fun creating new things. Now it's such a chore people would rather just rename the Sohie and Monk and call it a day. What if we stepped back from the Katana and looked at what things we CAN create not HAVE to?
I'm not sure it's entirely a 4e thing. I recall plenty of people during 3rd saying we didn't need a samurai or ninja class, that the fighter and rogue worked perfectly fine.
One of the coolest ideas I've seen was near the beginning of 4e. Someone wanted to do a martial arts campaign, but no monk. The solution people came up with was to use weapons and armor as different schools and styles. Who needs to create things when you can use what you've got?
adding this would immediatly point out that a katana is not a longsword (even if it would be a +3/1d8/versitile)
Nodachi and Odachi really aren't practical weapons (they were usually placed in shrines), but hey, it's D&D.
Foot soldiers would carry the sword with the flat edge against the shoulder and the fuchi, or butt of the tsuka, in the palms of the hands and the blade facing out toward the enemy. The sword would often be thrown down or at the enemy.
Though... Didn't ninja use ninjato - a short sword?
to be very accurate, the ninjato was a normal sword (if you go undercover, its stupid to use identifieng weapons), but sometimes the blade itself was shorter, making it faster to draw and supprize your opponent
I don't want to dive through every single post of this thread again. It may have been brought up before, but I'd like it in simple words. Why is a katana so different than other swords in the PHB, that it justifies it having it's own special statblock?
The arguement I'm still hearing is, unfortunatly, "the katana is an iconic Japanese weapon, and therefore needs it's own statistics". A Gladious could be concidered an "iconic weapon" too. Should it have unique stats? The difference seems to be "I like the katana, so it should have different stats".
Ceiling, in your last response to me, you state quite plainly that you feel a katana is different than a longsword because it needs more training. Why? Can you give me a source of information for why this sword NEEDED more training? And if it does, why are Bastard Sword stats not fitting? The stats for bastard swords are esentially a framework for "a sword that's better than other swords". So if we swallow the "katanas need more training... for some reason" arguement, then why can't it use bastard sword stats?
You get very defensive about this whole thing, which is puzzling to me. I'm just asking: WHY THE KATANA?? You seem to be fumeing that I hate the idea of new weapons in general. On the contrary, I thinknew weapon ideas can be quite refreshing. However, the issue I have is with the katana in particular being a new weapon. I personally feel that it can be safely replicated with one of the other myriad swords in the PHB already, because it's a sword. It's just a sword.
It's not unique, it's not inovative, it's not even used in a unique way. [This is a joke, it is for fun] I know I'll be absolutly drowned with responses about how, no, it require super special training and had it's own unique, supirior style kawaii uguu~ [/this is a joke, it is for fun] , but it's still a blade, it does damage, it's not expected to have the same "weakpoint for MASSIVE DAMAGE" property that axs have, it doesn't have reach, it is a heavy blade because it is a relativly long sword (or, if you prefer, a longsword). What I'm saying is that in game terms, it fits perfectly as a pretty standard heavy blade weapon. Adding keywords JUST FOR ONE WEAPON is suspicious, to say the least. You keep saying it's not because Japanese weapons have magical properties, but it apparently needs super special properties to be represented "properly".
Time to be constructive. Here is my idea. A katana is a longsword. Flavour it how you like, done. To give the "feel" that is wanted by posters here, I suggest the following feats be made available:
Kenjutsu Training
You are expertly trained in using the katana, and weild it with deadly proficiancy.
Pre Reqs: Prof with Longsword, maybe a STR and DEX requirement
Effect: When weilding longswords, increase the damage dice used to d10s.
Special: This feat is a Training feat. A character may have only one Training feat.
Rational: I got the name from Wikipedia, where I was told it was "The Art of Sword Fighting". This feat represents being expertly trained in the use of the style commonly associated with the katana, without having to concede that the katana REQUIRES an awesome fighting style. It might also be neat to make seperate feats for other "expert fighting styles", similar to this, perhaps with different weapon or ability requirements, even some that are also with the longsword. The special restriction is to prevent redundancy with other feats and to stop characters from having a billion styles that they switch between.
Mechanics wise, this feat changes the "katana" into a Supirior weapon. This way, someone with enough training to reliabley use basic swords (longsword prof) can still USE the katana, but someone trained in this special style will be able to do it better, because he is using a more advanced fighting style.
The second feat is to focus more on the unique properties usually attributed to the katana:
Iaijutsu Style Expert
Even drawing your sword is a deadly action for you.
Pre Reqs: Kenjutsu Training, more STR and DEX requirements
Effect: Once per encounter you may add 1d10 damage per tier to a single attack as long as the attack was made with a longsword you drew in the same round. If the target was a minion, instead gain +5 to your attack roll.
Special: This is an Style Expert feat. A character may have only one Style Expert feat.
Rational: This feat serves to further diversify the katana fighting style. This "kill on draw style" is a very common theme with the katana, so I thought it was appropriate. The reason I added the minion clause was so that this ability isn't wasted if used on them. It gives nice imagery of the minion being sliced in half with one swing. The restriction is, again, just a safeguard so that these special feats aren't abused.
Why are these feats better than making the katana a whole new weapon? Let me explain. Firstly, it reduces clutter. We don't have to make a new weapon with new keywords. Secondly, it allows for the followup feat to diversify. Yes, we could have made the follow up feat simply usable by those using our new katana weapon, but there are some downsides to that, namely it forces those who like the mechanics of the feat but not the katana to reflavour the new weapon, perhaps with excess baggage from new keywords. This way, reflavour is quick and painless.
The first training feat looks like "Bastard Sword Prof, but with pre reqs", and it is. The reason for that is to restrict the style feat to those who fit with the style's idea. This helps diversify the feeling of those who do choose to take it. And it's all about the feel in the end, isn't it? The style feat is pretty powerful, so I think it's worth it.
This template also opens the doors to new styles like this. The possibilities are endless. You can always go the multiclass route, too, but this is an option that is far less labour intensive, and allows the character to still level up as normal, which can often be desirable. It's a little splash of flavour.
To try one last time:
I don't want to dive through every single post of this thread again. It may have been brought up before, but I'd like it in simple words. Why is a katana so different than other swords in the PHB, that it justifies it having it's own special statblock?
The arguement I'm still hearing is, unfortunatly, "the katana is an iconic Japanese weapon, and therefore needs it's own statistics". A Gladious could be concidered an "iconic weapon" too. Should it have unique stats? The difference seems to be "I like the katana, so it should have different stats".
Ceiling, in your last response to me, you state quite plainly that you feel a katana is different than a longsword because it needs more training. Why? Can you give me a source of information for why this sword NEEDED more training? And if it does, why are Bastard Sword stats not fitting? The stats for bastard swords are esentially a framework for "a sword that's better than other swords". So if we swallow the "katanas need more training... for some reason" arguement, then why can't it use bastard sword stats?
You get very defensive about this whole thing, which is puzzling to me. I'm just asking: WHY THE KATANA?? You seem to be fumeing that I hate the idea of new weapons in general. On the contrary, I thinknew weapon ideas can be quite refreshing. However, the issue I have is with the katana in particular being a new weapon. I personally feel that it can be safely replicated with one of the other myriad swords in the PHB already, because it's a sword. It's just a sword.
It's not unique, it's not inovative, it's not even used in a unique way. [This is a joke, it is for fun] I know I'll be absolutly drowned with responses about how, no, it require super special training and had it's own unique, supirior style kawaii uguu~ [/this is a joke, it is for fun] , but it's still a blade, it does damage, it's not expected to have the same "weakpoint for MASSIVE DAMAGE" property that axs have, it doesn't have reach, it is a heavy blade because it is a relativly long sword (or, if you prefer, a longsword). What I'm saying is that in game terms, it fits perfectly as a pretty standard heavy blade weapon. Adding keywords JUST FOR ONE WEAPON is suspicious, to say the least. You keep saying it's not because Japanese weapons have magical properties, but it apparently needs super special properties to be represented "properly".
Time to be constructive. Here is my idea. A katana is a longsword. Flavour it how you like, done. To give the "feel" that is wanted by posters here, I suggest the following feats be made available:
Kenjutsu Training
You are expertly trained in using the katana, and weild it with deadly proficiancy.
Pre Reqs: Prof with Longsword, maybe a STR and DEX requirement
Effect: When weilding longswords, increase the damage dice used to d10s.
Special: This feat is a Training feat. A character may have only one Training feat.
Rational: I got the name from Wikipedia, where I was told it was "The Art of Sword Fighting". This feat represents being expertly trained in the use of the style commonly associated with the katana, without having to concede that the katana REQUIRES an awesome fighting style. It might also be neat to make seperate feats for other "expert fighting styles", similar to this, perhaps with different weapon or ability requirements, even some that are also with the longsword. The special restriction is to prevent redundancy with other feats and to stop characters from having a billion styles that they switch between.
Mechanics wise, this feat changes the "katana" into a Supirior weapon. This way, someone with enough training to reliabley use basic swords (longsword prof) can still USE the katana, but someone trained in this special style will be able to do it better, because he is using a more advanced fighting style.
The second feat is to focus more on the unique properties usually attributed to the katana:
Iaijutsu Style Expert
Even drawing your sword is a deadly action for you.
Pre Reqs: Kenjutsu Training, more STR and DEX requirements
Effect: Once per encounter you may add 1d10 damage per tier to a single attack as long as the attack was made with a longsword you drew in the same round. If the target was a minion, instead gain +5 to your attack roll.
Special: This is an Style Expert feat. A character may have only one Style Expert feat.
Rational: This feat serves to further diversify the katana fighting style. This "kill on draw style" is a very common theme with the katana, so I thought it was appropriate. The reason I added the minion clause was so that this ability isn't wasted if used on them. It gives nice imagery of the minion being sliced in half with one swing. The restriction is, again, just a safeguard so that these special feats aren't abused.
Why are these feats better than making the katana a whole new weapon? Let me explain. Firstly, it reduces clutter. We don't have to make a new weapon with new keywords. Secondly, it allows for the followup feat to diversify. Yes, we could have made the follow up feat simply usable by those using our new katana weapon, but there are some downsides to that, namely it forces those who like the mechanics of the feat but not the katana to reflavour the new weapon, perhaps with excess baggage from new keywords. This way, reflavour is quick and painless.
The first training feat looks like "Bastard Sword Prof, but with pre reqs", and it is. The reason for that is to restrict the style feat to those who fit with the style's idea. This helps diversify the feeling of those who do choose to take it. And it's all about the feel in the end, isn't it? The style feat is pretty powerful, so I think it's worth it.
This template also opens the doors to new styles like this. The possibilities are endless. You can always go the multiclass route, too, but this is an option that is far less labour intensive, and allows the character to still level up as normal, which can often be desirable. It's a little splash of flavour.
Frankly, I think you're on the mark, and I wouldn't really even go as far as making seperate rules (or, by extension, seperate feats) for a katana ONLY because of aesthetics. The superior weapons shown in AV and whatnot have more than simple construction going for them: They're more unique, and they commonly would not be used in military campaigns. Rapiers are fencing weapons, and fencing is not a common, war-time combat style. The kukri isn't considered a dagger per se because its curving blade makes it unsuited for throwing. Construction may play a part, sure, but HOW IT'S USED will determine whether it's superior or not. Katana were used by warriors in war-time (though more as a backup weapon), so they're military.
The katana, elegant as it looks, is still a mildly curved blade that can be used for slashing or thrusting. Sound like a longsword? It kind of does to me.
If you're going to add in new weapons, you have to find if they're unique enough to be as such. The katana is nothing more than a mildly curved longsword. You could even look at the specs:
Longsword: 10-15" handle, approx. 30 in. blade
Many katana I see: 11" handle, 29" blade
I rest my case.
To those who say it's just a long sword or it's just a bastard sword tell you what go online and sell someone a kitana and instead of sending them a kitana send them a bastard or longsword see what there reaction is. If the kitana is the exact same and therefore don't need it's own stats then I am sure being the exact same that you would never know the difrence betwean a longsword and a kitana?
You miss the point of this assertion. People are not saying that longswords and bastards are the same in every regard. But they are similar enough (in weight, length, fighting technique, function, ect.) that their mechanical abstractions in the game can be treated as the same. Or to say it a slightly different way, the katana has no special qualities that justify the creation of a new stat of stats to represent it.
D&D weapons are abstractions meant to roughly parallel to many real life weapons. A D&D longsword doesn't just represent a single weapon, but rather a whole archetype of various weapons of a similar theme - specifically, being a one-handed, straight or shallow curved, medium weight, medium length blade. I'm no sword expert, but I do know that there are literally dozens of swords that can fit that description, and the D&D longsword represent all of them. Which one of them your D&D longsword is up to the flavor you wish to apply.
The same applies to the bastard sword, the dagger, the quarterstaff, the spike chain, the throwing axe, and really, any other weapon. And some weapon can be justified as belonging to more than one group, which is okay as well because, again, flavor is up to you.
That's not to say that you can't create new and separate stats for the katana if you wish. So long as the weapon is balanced against other weapons, no one would be able to complain from a purely mechanical stand point. And I'm sure we all love new options. But assertions that new stats or mechanics are somehow necessary, for no other reason because you feel existing weapon stats don't accurately represent it or that your the new stats more accurately represents it, are going continue to be question until you can come up with a solid defense to the contrary. And given how often this topic has come up, been hotly discussed for tens or even hundreds of pages, have no concensuss reached, died, and be reborn again like a malevolent phoenix to start the process anew, it's improbable that this Alchemist Stone of New Katana Stat Defense could ever be synthesized.
Now if you had some other reason for wanted to create to mechanics, even if that reason was simply because wanted to experiment with a new mechanical niche, you would probably be met with less resistance to the idea.
ok ok one last line of rant more of a question
I keap reading in posts that people are tring to make the kitanma into a super weapon and all godlike but what I want to know is where do you see godlike super unbalenced super good kitanas being posted, I have ben following this thread for a while and I have sean a few slightly wrongly balenced builds but nothing that is better by far then other weapons that can be found
Please I realy would like one of these people claiming that were tring to make a super powered kitana to show me the posts, show me this kitana build that was posted before this rant that lists a super unbalenced kitana build
Is there even a single build for the kitana thats ben posted thus far that is actualy way overpowered???
You must be new here. You missed all of the katanna threads a few years back during 3e. Discussions got so heated that the topic of katanas - I repeat, the actual topic - got banned from the boards for a while so everyone involved could cool their jets. Mildy to outrageously overpowered katana stats and mechanics were posted time and time again. And by outrageously, I mean that 3d10 was a serious suggestion for base damage. And just as often, such stats were defended for, literally, no other reason that because katanas were simply "better".
More substantially constructed arguments, both for and against new katana stats were also given, hashed, and re-hashed again, with no end to the debate. But the one trend that was consistant was that most people who felt that katanas were ill-represented as bastardswords (which is what they officially were in 3e) also felt that they required a mechanical advantage of some sort above what bastardsword stats granted.
If you want to see these arguments for yourself, you need only search the archives.
I ask respectfully for you to please take the time to type in proper english. I feel it is disrespectful to put so little effort into typing that I can just barely understand what you're saying.
Back to the topic at hand, you seem fixated on the passing "Those who want katana stats want them super powered" thing, and seem to have gotten the wrong impression that that is the only problem. That's seriously not the central part of the arguement. The arguement I and some others are making is that in game mechanic terms, the stats for the longsword seem in line with what the katana is. It's a sword about the same length as the longsword, weildable in one or two hands, is as accurate as other swords, and has no real special properties to speak of.
Even if the custom katana stats being brought up are not suggesting ridiculous base damage or insane effects, they usually try to add completely arbitrary or unnessesary keyword abilities that will only ever be used for this one weapon. I personally feel that all that does is add clutter and doesn't really add anything to the game. All it does is tell us that the katana is a special snowflake that your super cool character has.
But it's odd that it's always the sword that has special properties. Isn't that a bit bizzare? Wasn't it the style used by those wielding katanas that makes those characters cool? Isn't it the characters skill that we want to emphasis, not that the sword makes you awesome? That's why I personally feel that making feats representing training in a special style are better than just saying "Those with a katana are super master martial artists because they are using a katana".
On that note, would you like to look at the last, oh, HALF of my post and give me your opinion on this method being used instead of katanas having special stats by default?
(lots of words)...
Bastard sword has it's own stats why??
...
So if the longsword is versatile (therefore matching the real life description of the bastard sword) then why does it get it's own stats? further why does it have BETTER stats then a longsword.
Simple. The developers needed a name to give the superior version of their basic one-handed heavy blade stats. "Bastard Sword" is a title that's as good as any other, and has a recognizable history of being used for the more damaging one-handed sword variants in D&D culture. They could have called those stats "Longsword", "Epee", "Rapier", "Nodaichi", "Katana", "Flachion", "War Sythe", "Battle Axe", or "Clown Shoe" if they wanted. Ultimately, its an arbitrary chosen name applied to an arbitrarily crafted set of stats, which current convention persists as a nod to past convention, so that players have upgrade they can spend a feat on.
In other words, A simple game abstraction to provide a basic, yet readily mutable, anchor between flavor and crunch. Nothing more than a placeholder. The same applies to every other weapon - nay - every other named mechanic in the system.
No, really. That's it. You're thinking about this way too hard, bra.
Why not use a longsword and call it a bastard sword?
Why not indeed. You can, and many do; Or at least, do similar things to other game mechanics. That's what reflavoring is all about. I call my sorcerer's dagger a sword all the time because 1) I can, 2) because it fits his flavor better, and 3) (and I'm sure I'm butchering the quote) "the difference between the longest dagger and the shortest sword is about six inches".
As I said early, D&D weapon don't only represent one weapon. They are an abstraction for whole weapon archetypes (which often overlap).
The kitana is more difrent in both game terms description and real life difrences then the bastard sword is from the longsword. So why would someone NOT wish to describe those difrences by using it's own stats?
You continue to make this assertion, but you have yet to identify what those unique "eastern" properties would be once converted into game mechanics, let alone defend how these properties warrant new stats or how existing stats don't cover eastern weapons. Until you identify those game properties, you don't even have anything to defend.
could longsword be used for the katana, yup should it. In my humble long winded opinion NO.
So which is it?
Would you rather see a small list of stats or would you rather see a long huge list of difrent weapons each with it's own stats and own special feal.
I'd rather see a small list of stats and let the character's powers make the difference. Fortunately, that's what we have.
Would you rather see a small list of stats or would you rather see a long huge list of difrent weapons each with it's own stats and own special feal.
I'd rather see a small list of stats and let the character's powers make the difference. Fortunately, that's what we have.
+1
You're not likely to convince someone who thinks a katana doesn't need special stats that it needs special stats and you're not likely to convince someone who has come up with their own set of katana stats that yours are better than theirs.
It would be a lot more productive to come up with feats and powers that invoke the feeling of different styles regardless of the weapon stats used to represent the katana than it is to try to convince people that your stats are better than whatever method they use.
To each there own.
There is no right or wrong answer, there is no reason a katana needs it's own stats nor is there a reason that it does not need it's own stats
so ignoriing the katana which is a never ending no win no lose conversation lets go otno these weapon style feats becouse they are a good idea.
__________________-**edit* actualy will make my own thread for this idea**(didn't want to side track the current topic any further)
on a side note also, I would love to break the weapons down to a point chart. so you would choose a base weapon type
Sword, axe, spear, whatever then you buy the damage and properties of the weapon using a set number of points.
A chart such as this could serv 2 purposes.
Allow a player to create there own weapon in a balenced manor fluffing it however they like
Allow dms to create new weapons for there game that are ballenced
just a idea though
So I said, "Your Katana hits your foe's armor, promptly breaking the blade and rendering it useless"
The moral of the story folks? Beware asking your DM to make your precious nippon super special Katana different from other weapons in game or else they might do some research and find that the only real distinguishing factor between the Katana and the European made sword was that the Katana was made of greatly inferior metals and was crafted so thinly as to be unable to withstand more than a few strikes before breaking.
What you've posted pretty much amounts to the fact that the creators of Katanas could somewhat compensate for the inherent weaknesses of the resources available to them. I agree that an excellently made sword can compensate for those weaknesses. The logical fallicy is that swordmakers in other parts of the world weren't just as skilled at creating swords but ALSO had the benefit of better ingredients. It also completely ignores the fact that the Katana, while an amazingly effective weapon against an unarmored or lightly armored opponent for a few cuts, will degrade at an alarming pace simply by virtue of its construction. Katanas were extremely sharp, there's no denying it, but they were also very thin and prone to breaking and bending much easier than a thicker blade. Against a highly armored target, the Katana was a greatly inferior weapon not only because a strike with it carried less concussive force than a heavier blade but also because only a few direct hits against their opponent's armor would pretty much ruin the sword.
But I don't really care what special rules people put in their games. In some cultures the Katana was mystified to a great degree, and a campaign which features that type of setting the Katana should definitely have special rules of some kind or mundane Katanas should simply not exist and only exist in magical quantities. In other settings where the Katana isn't in of itself significant to the campaign, the normal rules for Longsword work just fine.
D&D wise I agree 100% besides D&D though I disagreee, the katana was made from quench hardened steal, It was reinforced by many means.
Well it is D&D we're talking about. Special forging process don't mean a thing in D&D, where you standard weapons will never break, rust, or dull unless its appropriate for the story. D&D weapon stats don't care about how the weapon is forged or what grade of metals/alloys are used in its construction (unless we're talking about fantasy materials like adamantine and so forth). What people have been asking for, and what you haven't given, are what special properties of the weapon design itself necessitates its own stats.
will save the people the trouble of me posting anouther long post I will refer you to the specifics.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katana_constructio...
Nitpicking here, but you're not really going though any trouble if all you're doing is c/p'ing large blocks of text from other sites. It's always better to link to large blocks of text then c/p'ing them in a forum discussion. It not only makes you look more professional (and look less like you're plagiarizing), but it's more courteous to other posters since it reduces visual clutter and makes your words easier to identify and follow. If that's not possible or feasible, putting large text in sblocks really helps. But I digress.
The katana is a sword as special a scimitar or rapier or broadsword.
And the rapier and scimitar are not very special at all, which was the point I was making in my last post. What I said about the bastard sword applies to every weapon.
Any chance of us going back to discussing the broader topic of converting OA to 4e, as to assist the OP?
In a final attempt to get the conversation back to non katana talk (the original topic) since the katana talk has long long ben settled and is now but a debate I am deleating every post (beside this one) I have left that refers to katana.So converting oriental adventure to 4th ed, What classes and fluff could be added what kinda feats might be created to further gain the feal of the oriental adventures.
Perhaps a fighting style feat line for martial arts, since we decided to just use current classes this could allow those classes to beter feal like oriental versions. what other ideas (besides weapon talk) can you all think of
How would you convert Eunuch Warlock into a usable PP?
Schools
samurai
Crab = Great weapon Fighter, Barbarian
Crane = Could almost go TWF ranger here also since they have a very elusive fighting style if I remember correctly. just minus the duel weapon.
Dragon = Tempest or TWF Ranger- although I don't think the aggressive fighting style of the dragon fits the elusiveness of the ranger abilities.
Lion = Fighter,Warlord or (warrior/fighter)
Phoenix = fighter and sorcerer mix class, or fighter/warlock. since even their samurai have some shogenja ability/spells.
Scorpion = Rouge with Versatile Duelist or Rogue/fighter
Unicorn = Warlord Archer or Ranger Archer
Realistically I would sit down with each player and make each one out seperatly using just a few guidelines. Because each samurai of a clan is also from a different family each with its own style and tactics too.
This thread has significantly de-railed into a several-page long discussion of katanas, and only katanas.
Any chance of us going back to discussing the broader topic of converting OA to 4e, as to assist the OP?
alot of it can be done with the current material.
Samurai's were basically fighters and they still are.
Wu-Jen can be done by reflavouring characters (Metal could be attained through force powers, wood via Druid powers or reflavoured attacks).
Some of the others are more complex, but you can do it.
It'd help if there was a specific build to try and convert though.
You get very defensive about this whole thing, which is puzzling to me. I'm just asking: WHY THE KATANA??
why is a scimitar so different then a longsword? why a broadsword? why is a mordenkrad so much different then a maul? why is a craghammer so much different then a warhammer?
so, (following your caps) WHY NOT THE KATANA?
Kenjutsu Training I got the name from Wikipedia, where I was told it was "The Art of Sword Fighting"
kenjustu is not really "the art of sword fighting". its (litterly translated) sword-techniques. If I train a technique to parry blows with a sword, that's also kenjutsu. as would be a techique using a katana in one hand.
The katana, elegant as it looks, is still a mildly curved blade that can be used for slashing or thrusting. Sound like a longsword? It kind of does to me.
Oh come on now. A katana was a curved blade, only sharp at one side. Last time I checked longswords are sharp at both sides.
IMO katana's are as much longswords as bastards swords and broadswords are.
Oh come on now. A katana was a curved blade, only sharp at one side. Last time I checked longswords are sharp at both sides.
IMO katana's are as much longswords as bastards swords and broadswords are.
Uh-huh. So why doesn't the wakizashi have its own stats? Come on, folks, it's single-edged and curved, but the short sword is double-edged and straight. By that alone, that means the wakizashi should be its own weapon. That being the case, I WANT MY WAKIZASHI STATS, DAMMIT!!!!!
It's just an instace of you arguing aesthetics, is all. Just because a weapon looks slightly different doesn't warrant it being its own weapon. I've said it already, but: The weapons in the AV are different enough from their derivative that they are their own weapons. Kukri are not designed for throwing (don't give me that BS about Alice throwing one in one of the RE movies, they were not thrown the proper way), parrying daggers have elongated handguards, broadswords have wider and shorter blades, which changes the combat style for it. Triple flails are not standard flails, khopesh are very different from longswords because their hook-like designs makes them suited for tripping/trapping (which a longsword, by design alone, can't do unless you hold it by the blade, which would probably hurt), and so on and so on.
The weapons in the AV are different enough from their derivative that they are their own weapons. ... broadswords have wider and shorter blades, which changes the combat style for it.
(1) craghammer and mordenkrad? heck, there is no difference between a maul and greatclub other then astetics: heavy end meets other guys head ...
(2) I would have thought that singlebladed weapons had different techniques then dualbladed weapons - al least where broadswords or kopeshes have different techniques then other swords ...