The other thread is in danger of getting overwhelmed by the focus on sword talk and considering the theme of L5R, I bet that other threads are at risk of highjacking as well. Not that anybody intends to do so, it is just going to be a natural progression of discussion!

This will be a good place to keep all the discussions, arguments and theories as to the katana; both the historical facts of the sword in Japan and the place the sword should have in an RPG set in Rokugan.

For historical information on the Katana, I recommend the book Katana: The Samurai Sword by Stephen Turnbull. It gives lots of lovely details about what goes into making one (resources, rituals, etc.) that can be applied to games

The katana should be the polite weapon, the one you can carry around without suspicion. The one you settle "civilised" disagreements with.

Bows and heavy weapons should be the preferred (and more effective) weapons of war.

54 minutes ago, mortthepirate said:

The katana should be the polite weapon, the one you can carry around without suspicion. The one you settle "civilised" disagreements with.

Bows and heavy weapons should be the preferred (and more effective) weapons of war.

This was always one of the major issues with L5R. Katanas are not a good battlefield weapon when up against reach and range weapons.

44 minutes ago, tenchi2a said:

This was always one of the major issues with L5R. Katanas are not a good battlefield weapon when up against reach and range weapons.

true. But the old game never had a system to show the usefulness of reach (no, the skill masteries don't count. They are pretty awful)

I always felt that L5R 4E could have benefitted from a "Revised Edition" in that it was a very good system, but after 5 years they did have enough playtesting from player feedback to fine tune the product. To that end I generally saw Nodachi and Bisento put into the "Heavy Weapons" skill tree, and the smaller weapons were buffed. Then reach weapons were made relevant because generally, no one fought with yari or naginata since they were mechanically pretty lackluster.

I think putting a bigger focus on the mystical nature of the Rokugani katana would be a nice touch. Like, it is not just a sword, but the physical representation of the wielding samurai's very soul. It can do unexplainable things like cutting through steel easily or burn the hands of an unauthorized wielder because part of its properties are purely metaphysical and do not adhere to natural laws. This must be also shared between all samurai weapons (katana, wakizashi, naginata, kaiken).

Also, it would be nice to have different profiles for wielding the katana one-handed and two-handed.

40 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

I think putting a bigger focus on the mystical nature of the Rokugani katana would be a nice touch. Like, it is not just a sword, but the physical representation of the wielding samurai's very soul. It can do unexplainable things like cutting through steel easily or burn the hands of an unauthorized wielder because part of its properties are purely metaphysical and do not adhere to natural laws. This must be also shared between all samurai weapons (katana, wakizashi, naginata, kaiken).

Also, it would be nice to have different profiles for wielding the katana one-handed and two-handed.

I would happily accept this alternative if the supernatural aspects of the setting are more thoroughly integrated.

While in reality a katana isn't a very good weapon for the battlefield, it's hard to argue against the iconic nature of it as the weapon of a samurai warrior, and how it is often seen in pop culture as an extension of the samurai's soul and fighting prowess.

So odds are good that we'll still be seeing katanas as one of the better weapons in this new version of the RPG, but I don't think it's going to be the ultimate melee weapon, but is the one that's socially polite to carry with you in most circumstances, much like a swordcane or smallsword was socially acceptable for the upper class to carry on their persons at social events during Victorian times.

The culture of Rokugan help as well by the fact that the focus on Katana as an heirloom from ancestors makes it the most probable weapon to awaken and display Nemuranai grade abilities.

Despite being the one who brout up the katana issue, I'd still like to see it at least somewhat more emphasized to match the chanbara type themes of the setting. 4E just had it be WAY more effective than anything else.

I'm playing in a 4e game now.... katana's have that useful 1k1 void trick, but outside of dueling they are too weak, you always want to go for higher keep weapons. Though, I may be biased because only one of us has a school (Duelist) that really makes effective use of a katana.

But techniques making katana use more effective.... is IMHO thematic to rokugan, BUT a Tsuruchi Archer or Hida with a tetsubo (or an Ono) is going to do a LOT more damage.

Katanas were not the best weapon of 4e. Nodachi, Bisento, Tetsubo, Ono, bows, Scimitars and even goddamn Tonfas and Hand of Stones-Jujitsu 7-Monk Punches were all at least 50% better than Katana. Only thing that saved Katanas was the fact that certain schools were forced to use it for simple attacks.

I would actually prefer L5R completely bucks the idea that Katana are the god weapons. I do NOT like lightsabers, and don't want katana to be lightsabers. What I'd like to see is an amount of reverence culturally for the katana - it is the sign of a Samurai's status, it is often an heirloom passed down through the generations. It should be revered as a symbol, but it is not a god weapon. When it comes to combat it should be, as we've discussed - a weapon that is acceptable to carry everywhere with you, thus every samurai would want to be invested in the skill - but if you were protecting a caravan you would be carrying a Naginata, and probably wearing light armor (His Father's Daughter).

When I think of samurai one of the things that sticks out in my mind is that they are NOT specialists in a single weapon, but rather they use horse riding, bows, swords, pole arms, and unarmed martial arts in combat. I'd like to see a system that is more fluid to allow the variety in tools to come out.

While the Katana isn't the best weapon - its not because it can't kill. Katana are deadly. What we need is a system that represents combat simply, and provides an engaging way to combat with more than just damage as a balancing lever.

I went over this in the other post. I'll detail it here so its all in one spot.

There is a dueling card game called Yomi that handled range in an interesting way. If you were "at range" then a non-ranged attack wouldn't deal damage, but would negate the "at range" aspect so future attacks could deal damage. Similarly if you were not "at range" a ranged attack wouldn't deal damage, but would establish range. I think this could be done in combat where if your opponent has a ready weapon putting you "at range" then you would need to succeed once to get in range, and again to cause damage - or succeed once with raises if the system accommodates that. This would be done based on the weapon class, so if you were using a tanto or were unarmed you would be "at range" against a sword. This also gives a cool interaction where, if your opponent isn't "ready" with their weapon and you get the jump on them you could begin combat not "at range" giving sword masters and ninja a great way to get the jump on their opponent.

This allows weapons to be as lethal as they should be, as we fight for range rather than damage. The game can be deadly, but still have this breathing room for combat. This also gives light to being a universal bushi. If you have a polearm and your opponent gets within your reach, you could perform an iai draw cut with your sword, or switch to grappling. You could also use a more defensive weapon like a Jitte or Sai which could have a bonus feat for closing the range on an opponent.

Armor is a whole other topic... I'm still thinking about how best to represent it, but I'd like armor to pose a good challenge to combat.

As for the "katana should be good or not", my stance is this - I want the katana to be good. I want it to be viable, competetive choice, simply because in my list of priorities "genre emulation of iconic katana coolness" is higher than "historical simulation of sengoku warfare". I care about aesthetics, and aesthetic of katana wielding badass is my #1 priority in a game about katana wielding badassess. As for other weapons? I'm in the camp of "I don't care about real life utility of a weapon, I want weapon to emphasize the wielders personality". I want spear wielders to wield spears efficiently and with style. So I guess I want weapon differences to be a wash and power coming from specialization, instead of inherent weapon abilities.

21 minutes ago, WHW said:

As for the "katana should be good or not", my stance is this - I want the katana to be good. I want it to be viable, competetive choice, simply because in my list of priorities "genre emulation of iconic katana coolness" is higher than "historical simulation of sengoku warfare". I care about aesthetics, and aesthetic of katana wielding badass is my #1 priority in a game about katana wielding badassess. As for other weapons? I'm in the camp of "I don't care about real life utility of a weapon, I want weapon to emphasize the wielders personality". I want spear wielders to wield spears efficiently and with style. So I guess I want weapon differences to be a wash and power coming from specialization, instead of inherent weapon abilities.

Yes and no - just like the Scorpion Clan Bushi are going to have tactics that would likely appeal to a Scorpion Clan player, the Naginata should have traits that appeal to a player who wants to wield a Naginata. As such I think giving the weapons certain aspects is pretty cool. This also allows the GM to present situations where a player may be deprived of his preferred weapon for a scene, or might make a scene of arming for war by grabbing the serious weapons (like Mulan grabbing her father's armor and sword.)

Damage is certainly NOT the area to focus on differences. Direct damage should be as lethal in swords as it is in other weapons. What should be a factor is the tactical layer, and the social layer. What feats a weapon can be used for, how quick a weapon is ready, and how easily it is to bring with you are the areas I'd like to see focused on. This can be blended with the user's skill, but I think weapon selection should mean something. Even in the Tokugawa peace era we had Kojiro wielding a longer sword, and people were developing unique weapons to set themselves apart such as a sickle and chain, or duel wielding in addition to unique tactics involving how to step, or how to hold the sword, or stare down your opponent.

Well that settles it. No more posting before bed lol. As had been pointed out perhaps "not good" was not the best way to say it. Maybe "Not the optimal battlefield weapon" would be better.

The thing is that AEG made some major errors when depicting military units in Japan during the samurai era. in truth only about 20% of most units were made up of samurai.

average unit in the Sengoku era

Infantry

1. unit commander: Mounted, normally a mid ranking samurai

2. 3-4 Officers: Foot, landless low ranking samurai, main elite fighters, reasonably well armored, short spear and katana

3. 12-20 ashigarus: Foot, farmers that have there taxes payed by serving in the army, lightly armored, weapons depending on the type and size of the unit. very long pike or shield and bow would be the norm.

Cavalry

There is great debate on how horseman were organized, but in general its agree that they use manly for charges, skirmishers, and overrunning the enemy once they broke.

typical weapons would be bows and long spears.

these units would be formed into the army with group commanders (normal family members and vassals of the daimyo) organizing the formations.

The main issues here was that the L5R RPG was based off a card game. so to give it that feel (IMHO) they went with samurai heavy armies.

It's less "major errors" and more "we want a game about fantasy samurai engaging in fantasy combat". Samurai of Rokugan are much more than samurai warrior caste of Japan, too. They are also far more numerous.

Just remember the double-edged sword (clearly brought back by the Unicorn) is that if the armies are all samurai, it makes your characters scrubs too. In a world full of samurai, a samurai is common and unremarkable. So there's narrative value in both versions, which is what makes RPGs so great: the ability to pick and choose and construct. Clearly some people want giant armies of samurai, others would want the samurai to still be somewhat special in the setting. Really the difference in perception between what is an "error" and what is a "feature" of the setting, lol.

I always made the point of Samurai being the elite of all martial formations, with Ashigaru and other levies being the bulk of the armies in my settings

On 9/30/2017 at 9:14 AM, bloodycelt said:

BUT a Tsuruchi Archer or Hida with a tetsubo (or an Ono) is going to do a LOT more damage.

I feel like this may have been a sticking point with Mirumoto Hitomi on at least one occasion...

@shosuko I can really get behind what you're saying and I think there are a lot of different avenues to try and make that work but it will be hard to find one that a.) please a lot players (not even ALL the players, just a good amount of them) and b.) is mechanically smoothed out enough to work. I feel like one of the things that sets L5R RPG apart from a lot of other RPG's, and this has varied over editions, is how deadly the world is. Because of its source material, where samurai can get cut in half with one sword swing, Rokugan tries to and probably should depict swords as dangerous. I agree more numbers is not better, and that lightsabers are also not the answer. By the same token, metal is sharp and flesh is squishy.

But, something that hasn't really seemingly been proposed yet, si the attachment of mechanical honor to weapon stats. I know this might make things more complex, but even a little adjustment or guideline in rules could go a long way toward easing the use of katana in civilian settings and no-dachi in military ones. Basically (and this presupposes that FFG L5R RPG even has honor mechanics), there could be either an honor bump or honor penalty to players using certain weapons in public outside of military situations. So when players break out a katana in the middle of town, everybody of course scrambles for cover but some nod their heads sagely at the honor of the warrior caste. But when the gloves come off and someone drags a tetsubo into a duel, their honor score starts to sink as others shake their heads and go "Do you even katana, bro?"

There are probably a lot of flaws to that plan and alot of work you would have to do in implementing it fairly. And of course you might also then want to include and honor mechanic for certain weapons used on the battlefield. And when you give some dice a cookie...Well, too many rules is no fun times.

This is where L5R weapons stats breakdown in my opinion. The problem that most games like this face is how does one make the Katana a weapon worth use/carrying when there are far better weapons when it comes to damage and utility. To the samurai it was a matter of honor and status, but in a RPG most players are going to go for damage and effectiveness. It all well and good to give Katanas a mythical status in the game but that just leads to players carrying them because it is expected of them. So the designer chose to make the Katanas the best weapon in the game and link most of the Ranks to it is some way to counter this.

That said Aedo makes a good point on how to handle this issues. Hamstringing other weapons to make the Katana worth carrying is not the answer. The game needs to make the Katana a symbol not a super weapon.

To this end linking it to to honor would be a great idea. This is even touched on in the write-ups for the crab where using you Katana to fight the forces of the shadowlands is consider dishonoring you ancestors. Now truth be told we all know the reason is because Heavy weapons are more effective on shadowland creature, but the fact that they need to come up with a reason show the honor that the Katana holds within rokugan society.

40 minutes ago, tenchi2a said:

This is where L5R weapons stats breakdown in my opinion. The problem that most games like this face is how does one make the Katana a weapon worth use/carrying when there are far better weapons when it comes to damage and utility. To the samurai it was a matter of honor and status, but in a RPG most players are going to go for damage and effectiveness. It all well and good to give Katanas a mythical status in the game but that just leads to players carrying them because it is expected of them. So the designer chose to make the Katanas the best weapon in the game and link most of the Ranks to it is some way to counter this.

That said Aedo makes a good point on how to handle this issues. Hamstringing other weapons to make the Katana worth carrying is not the answer. The game needs to make the Katana a symbol not a super weapon.

To this end linking it to to honor would be a great idea. This is even touched on in the write-ups for the crab where using you Katana to fight the forces of the shadowlands is consider dishonoring you ancestors. Now truth be told we all know the reason is because Heavy weapons are more effective on shadowland creature, but the fact that they need to come up with a reason show the honor that the Katana holds within rokugan society.

Certainly - the real problem here is we need to make a system that is more universal, appealing to each samurai fantasy. For a low-fantasy game that wants to be more gritty, Sengoku syle adventure the katana shouldn't be the best weapon. Even in a more fanciful world a player shouldn't be shunted for picking a non-katana weapon - but I guess the main point is we do need to give players a reason to wield their swords amidst the variety of specialist weapons available. A reason that isn't just "because society deems it a civil weapon," but actually backs it up with mechanics.

What if there were an advantage a player could take on character creation that gave them a bonus to using a Katana (maybe a specific katana, like an ancestral weapon bonus, or maybe just a bonus to katana in general, maybe tied to honor) which allows the katana to stand up to any other weapon and allow the katana-samurai fantasy to flourish without removing the justification for having all of the other weapons of war, and students of said weapons?

If a player wants to play a katana wielding samurai, or a GM wants to run a story featuring katana prominently, then the players can take this advantage. A GM could even give it as a free advantage if they preferred.

My concern with the sword isn't just about my own low-fantasy games, but also a concern about game balance and player satisfaction.

If a katana is simply better than other weapons, and is also the most common, then a player just needs 1 weapon skill. This feels a bit too close to min/maxing, and indirectly penalizes a player who may take multiple weapons as they've spent more points for versatility in a world that doesn't value it. Likewise as a courtier is learning etiquette, sincerity, courtier, manipulation, oratory, go, falconry ect the bushi has maxed katana and could kill the whole room before they finish teaching him how to properly to say hello.

Also if a character is forced to consider the weakness of the sword in certain situations they might feel better about diversifying their skill set to be ready for whatever the game throws at them. When the times comes for a Naginata and Full Armor against a field of bandits the player can smile knowing this is the moment they've prepared for.

Obviously these are conversations a GM should have with their players so the characters can be built compatible to the story but I think its important the core mechanics favor trade offs of strength and weakness, and put value in diversity to prevent munchkin min/max builds and to allow the GM to vary the playing field with a wider experience. I would be okay with the Katana Advantage because it then costs whatever creation points are required, equating its cost closer to what a diversified skill set requires, and sets the character a bit further back so they have more room for growth before they cap out.

The katana should be a strong middle pick. Other weapons should require fighting a certain way to be better. I see the weapon tags and such from star wars coming into play as a way to balance, but even then there's always going to be a minmax choice. I just hope it's balanced enough for a player like me who'll sacrifice a bit of power for cool.

Personally, I like the idea of having options . I understand that, historically, certain weapons are better than others, but in a game--unless you're getting super, super realistic simulationist--making options relatively equal is probably for the best. To me, 'game breakers' exist in real life and are desired (see: spears over swords, bows over most melee weapons, guns over all of the above), but in a game, you can't have game breakers; in real life, the spear/polearm may be the game breaker of ancient melee weapons, but a game has to work around that.

I feel relatively confidant that Fantasy Flight can handle weapons in a satisfying way, whether or not it uses some kind of version of Genesys or not.

In the Star Wars RPG, if I wanted to build a character that used a certain weapon or weapon type, there are plenty of options to allow me to satisfyingly do so. There are some who like to run the numbers and find the most optimal choice, but the differences are small enough that it's not really important. Star Wars generally favors ranged combat--which makes sense considering the setting--but playing a melee character isn't doomed to incompetence. Optimization really only matters if you're playing an MMO, which we aren't, or have a killer GM, in which case the weapons are not the problem.

And if it doesn't use Genesys, presumably there will be several of the same people working on both, and I feel they see the value of having options. A player who wants to wield spears or bows instead of a sword will be able to, and a player who goes for swords will be able to.