Curse

prodigy ming · Sep 17, 2006, 09:35 PM // 21:35

/NOT SIGNED

Besides the fact that I have always oppose anything ninja/samurai related to be added into Guildwars, it seems you hardly put any effort into creating this class.
Why would a samurai use a knife?? and definatly not Chi either. You only posted 2 poorly suggested attributes with no associated skills. If you are serious about getting feedback on this, post it when its finished. It seems like all you want out of this is to have people running around in samurai armor. Enough with the Japan worship and move on please.

-Loki- · Sep 18, 2006, 02:03 AM // 02:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

Real Samurai are a cross between a Warrior and a Ranger. While a Samurai was on horseback his primary weapon was the Bow. Once he was on the ground he would use his Katana(and perhaps a Wakisashi?).

Naginata were used on Horseback as well.

icedragon981 · Sep 18, 2006, 02:19 AM // 02:19

/not signed
Just make a warrior, give him a katana and be happy.

BahamutKaiser · Sep 18, 2006, 03:57 AM // 03:57

The warrior we have compared to a Samurai is about as simular as a Boxer to a Kung Fu Practicer, obviously dissimular.

As poor as this idea is, it does not have anything to do with how good or acceptable a Samurai class can be, and beyond that, Samurai is a much better class than the vast majority of class ideas stated thus far, it is more popular, more interesting and too elaborate to be pawned off as a warrior, even if you gave him a Katana. Katana are appropriately used in 2 hands with most techniques, and have to be wielded in a particular manner, unlike many edged clubs euros use a swords, and it also has the very distinct counterpart of a sheath as well.

I suppose of we can't have another class with a sword, even if it is the most popular sword type in the world, than we can very well rule out any kind of caster, because it would be too simular to casting spells like all the other casters in the game.

And as typically stated, you do not need to have any interest in a new class for it to market to other people, a great deal of people who would like it. Many of you don't want more classes because your comfortable with what you have, and some just want to see something else, well there are likely more people who want to see Samurai than any other class, and you don't need to use it if you want to keep what you already have. Obviously many people who do like samurai would come to this game if it where added, and present company doesn't speak for the market as such players who would play if samurai were available arn't here to root for it, so stop pretending like nobody likes it and it isn't good enough just because you have a bias against what other people would enjoy.

arcanemacabre · Sep 18, 2006, 04:17 AM // 04:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by BahamutKaiser

The warrior we have compared to a Samurai is about as simular as a Boxer to a Kung Fu Practicer, obviously dissimular.

Quite true, when you're talking fighting style. However, in GW, fighting style isn't factored in at all. It's all about the weapon, the skills, and the spells.

That said, a boxer and a Kung Fu practitioner would be very similar in GW. They would both use no weapons, melee brute force/dexterous dodging skills, and likely no spells. They are one in the same.

Therefore, a Samurai and a Warrior would be essentially the same, as well. Both use (or can use) swords and other melee weapons, both have melee brute force/dexterous dodging skills and weapon mastery, and no spells. Too similar, at least in GW.

so... /unsigned (despite how much I love the concept of "The Samurai")

Also (edit):

Quote:

suppose of we can't have another class with a sword, even if it is the most popular sword type in the world, than we can very well rule out any kind of caster, because it would be too simular to casting spells like all the other casters in the game.

I think the idea behind the Warrior (or rather, what it has become with release of new classes to define it better), is a master of weapons, and a tank. That is the Warrior's niche.

So, in light of characters like the Assassin, the Ranger, the Dervish, and the Paragon, it's obvious they too can have a mastery of their particular weapon, but not inherently a master of weapon(s) in general. Those characters are not solely dependant on their weapons. Assassin could be the only real iffy one, as their primary depends on having a weapon, though the focus is more on criticals and combos rather then the weapon itself.

A Samurai is nothing without his weapon(s), just like the Warrior. I think that is the defining point of similarity in the class concept itself.

ValaOfTheFens · Sep 18, 2006, 04:22 AM // 04:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Loki-

Naginata were used on Horseback as well.

Hmmm...that seems practical. Samurai are a mix between 2 existing professions. Maybe 3 with the new spear wielding guys.

/not signed. after carefully consideration.

Ristaron · Sep 18, 2006, 04:24 AM // 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addone_Abaddon

1. I wasn't basing him on anime.
2.I've never played any of the FF games
3. I said he is not gonna be anything like the warrior.

The fact remains, we are not samurais and ninjas. Dervish was the closest I assume AreaNet's gonna chance naming something to a real group from the past.
Think up a different name, and this time try for one not already used by ten thousand similar new professions that are needlessly close to existing ones (mercenary, shadow warrior, etc).

BahamutKaiser · Sep 18, 2006, 08:19 PM // 20:19

A boxer isn't even a combat class, and a Kung Fu practicer would likely use one of the many weapons available in the art of Kung Fu, much more different than you give them credit for. Likewise, Samurai is far different than warrior than just sword type, the way it is wielded, the way a katana works is much different than a broad sword or massive edged club. The Warriors Sword is more simular to the Warriors Hammer than it is to a Katana, and the way Warriors use thier sword and sheild has almost nothing to do with samurai, shields on that note are not most common with Samurai.

The ability to distinguish or more accuratly the lack of it does not make Samurai simular to Warrior, it is unique, and can be made into a unique class, as I have proven time and time over again, feel free to look up some real Samurai concepts and see the marvel of abilities that can be coined on a Samurai class.

Where there is an interest in Samurai, there is a need to fulfill it, I would call that neccessary. There is no way to change warrior enough to fill this archtype, it is far from simular, Warrior does not practice most of the abilities Samurai do, and Samurai use none of the tools Warrior use, not Axe, not Shield, not Hammer, and not even european swords, Samurai have more in common with Ranger than Warrior.

actionjack · Sep 18, 2006, 08:26 PM // 20:26

Well, one can try to think of altnernative ways of adding a Samurai-ish character in.

I kinda want to see a Tengu or a Dracon (half-dragon) Samurai as oppose to it be another human proffession choice.

I think there could also be few other ways to add a Samurai-ish class (note the use of -ish) with out step too much on the toe of Warrior... and not as a new proffession..

Addone_Abaddon · Sep 18, 2006, 08:32 PM // 20:32

nunchucks? (or however you spell them)

they're sort of japanese, chinese weapons.