I've got a question regarding one of the new weapons. The Sai.

[Bloodfa]

First off, I love all of the changes you've made, or influenced, since you've started.  And the fact that you are very vocal with the same people who's skills and gameplay you affect.  You set a fine example.  

Okay, enough buttering up. " />  I've got a question and some feedback regarding the addition of the Sai as a weapon.  I'm tickled pink.  Seriously.  I use them myself at the dojo, and they're a thing of beauty when in motion (despite the fact that I think my son's got a better intuitive grasp of how to use the weapons than I do).  But ... the description and classes are wrong.  They are both a truncheon weapon (reversed and used as a small club) and a piercing weapon (the pointed end).  Slashing with them is not really effective, Electra's role in Daredevil aside.  They can block, parry, lock a blade in the forks, lock both weapons together overhead and twist to disarm a blade or bo staff, and be used offensively as described above. 

The use of them as, essentially, a dagger by Mages, Scouts, Berserkers and Guardians kind of kills it.  If anything, it's a Monk (read as: Martial Artist) and Predator (read as: Ninja) weapon.  It has very little reach, but is nimble and fast.  Not something that was wielded by Samurai, armored or unarmored.  A farmer's tool, adapted for combat by peasants who were barred by law from possession of a sword.  Guys wearing Gi's, not plate or chain, darting in, spinning, twisting, parrying ... it's an extension of your hand.  Even the katas for Sai are variations of open-hand katas.  Claws are useable only by Bruisers and Monks, these should follow suit.  It's kind of like allowing a Mage to use a Claymore; it doesn't quite mesh.  Bruisers and Monks have to share almost all of the things that make them truly stand out, appearance-wise, with metal wearing Fighters and Scouts; could you throw them a bone on this one?  Thanks in advance for your consideration on this, regardless of how it works out. 

[CorpseGoddess]

I heartily endorse your post, and second the request.  I would LOVE for Strep to be able to use these.  They're a brawler weapon for sure.  Rogues, too.  But the other classes?  Not so much.Please oh please, Domino...hear our plea!

[Ocello]

Yeah and I don't think mages and warriors would miss the Sai.  Make it Scout and brawler only, if nothing else.  I know the correct animations would be impossible to create, but even so...When I think of sai, I think of the Ninja Turtles and Raphael--ie martial arts and stealth.  It just makes sense.

[Illmarr]

I always think of Elektra myself...

[Wulfborne]

Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote:

First off, I love all of the changes you've made, or influenced, since you've started.  And the fact that you are very vocal with the same people who's skills and gameplay you affect.  You set a fine example.  

Okay, enough buttering up. " />  I've got a question and some feedback regarding the addition of the Sai as a weapon.  I'm tickled pink.  Seriously.  I use them myself at the dojo, and they're a thing of beauty when in motion (despite the fact that I think my son's got a better intuitive grasp of how to use the weapons than I do).  But ... the description and classes are wrong.  They are both a truncheon weapon (reversed and used as a small club) and a piercing weapon (the pointed end).  Slashing with them is not really effective, Electra's role in Daredevil aside.  They can block, parry, lock a blade in the forks, lock both weapons together overhead and twist to disarm a blade or bo staff, and be used offensively as described above. 

The use of them as, essentially, a dagger by Mages, Scouts, Berserkers and Guardians kind of kills it.  If anything, it's a Monk (read as: Martial Artist) and Predator (read as: Ninja) weapon.  It has very little reach, but is nimble and fast.  Not something that was wielded by Samurai, armored or unarmored.  A farmer's tool, adapted for combat by peasants who were barred by law from possession of a sword.  Guys wearing Gi's, not plate or chain, darting in, spinning, twisting, parrying ... it's an extension of your hand.  Even the katas for Sai are variations of open-hand katas.  Claws are useable only by Bruisers and Monks, these should follow suit.  It's kind of like allowing a Mage to use a Claymore; it doesn't quite mesh.  Bruisers and Monks have to share almost all of the things that make them truly stand out, appearance-wise, with metal wearing Fighters and Scouts; could you throw them a bone on this one?  Thanks in advance for your consideration on this, regardless of how it works out. 

Dude, I'd support your cause if for nothing more than you brought forward a respectful request, supported by logical information, completely devoid of flames, sarcasm or veiled threats. This is the type of player feedback I assume they'd prefer anyway, so you probably get bonus points just for that.Aside from that, as one who plays several variations of fighters, scouts and finger-wagglers (no healers yet, unfortunately) I can't say that ANY of them would be put-out by not using these. I wholeheartedly agree that it should be monk/bruiser only, due to the nature of the weapon itself.~Hawke

[Lasai]

The game isn't real life.  The look is just that, a look.

It isnt even new.  Just player craftable.  I was looting bloodstained Sai in CL when I started the game.  They have been on NPC vendors forever.

Monks have been pandered to looks wise enough in this game, far more than any other class as far as distinctive weapons and armor only usable by them.

There is absolutely no "real world" justification for the psuedo Gi as implemented in this game, and I for one am very happy some of them are finally being recognized for what they are in t8, nothing more than alternative graphic armor.

Stat em for monks, fine.  Make them exclusive, no. 

No other class archetype has any distinctive Playermade items at all.  There is not a single Player made item, armor or weapon, that distinctively announces my Assassin as a Predator, nor can I think of any other archetype (save monks) that has a defining look.

I don't see any justification to denying this weapon to other classes based on its graphic appearance.  No single class should claim ownership of a look.

[Rainmare]

And I'll argue that it should be Monk/Bruiser only, and that the 'Gi' look, at least some form of it, should be exclusive to the Monk class, as well as thier rice hat.And that being said, there's should be some looks that are class specific that aren't. the Darkmetal look/Parade armor look should be Paladin specific. there should be black metallic armor with heavy skull motifs that should be SK specific.the Tower shield should be a Guardian only thing. Kite Shield should be a Crusader only thing, they should just make versions that have similar/indentical stats with unique looks. ie Pentient Greatshield look, Rylis shield look.There are plenty of looks in the game that proclaim a class, wether you are or not. my Paladin has never been mistaken by anyone to be a guard/zerker/sk simply because of the armor he wears. I spent a great deal of money and time to get him a chrome look, which translates to metallic silver. He simply looks like a Paladin should look. It's the same reason why I will never own a Warg on my paladin, no matter how good the bonus or stats are. I'll keep my cavalry armored horse. because A) the high end guild reward Horse version looks like crap, and B) A Warg just does not fit the look of a Paladin.I liked it when I could tell a monk in an instant just because of the armor they wear.  Everyone wants looks that are class specific. granted Monks have gotten the most love here, But that don't mean that they shouldn't have it. if you wanted to argue it, I'd say challenge the Dev team to come up with unique looks for each class. and they better swear to all the powers that they don't screw it up like they did that pathetic excuse for a paladin class hat.But I'll also agree that a Sai, by the very nature of the weapon, should be monk/brusier and maybe scout only.

[Lasai]

Rainmare@Oasis wrote:

And I'll argue that it should be Monk/Bruiser only, and that the 'Gi' look, at least some form of it, should be exclusive to the Monk class, as well as thier rice hat.And that being said, there's should be some looks that are class specific that aren't. the Darkmetal look/Parade armor look should be Paladin specific. there should be black metallic armor with heavy skull motifs that should be SK specific.the Tower shield should be a Guardian only thing. Kite Shield should be a Crusader only thing, they should just make versions that have similar/indentical stats with unique looks. ie Pentient Greatshield look, Rylis shield look.There are plenty of looks in the game that proclaim a class, wether you are or not. my Paladin has never been mistaken by anyone to be a guard/zerker/sk simply because of the armor he wears. I spent a great deal of money and time to get him a chrome look, which translates to metallic silver. He simply looks like a Paladin should look. It's the same reason why I will never own a Warg on my paladin, no matter how good the bonus or stats are. I'll keep my cavalry armored horse. because A) the high end guild reward Horse version looks like crap, and B) A Warg just does not fit the look of a Paladin.I liked it when I could tell a monk in an instant just because of the armor they wear.  Everyone wants looks that are class specific. granted Monks have gotten the most love here, But that don't mean that they shouldn't have it. if you wanted to argue it, I'd say challenge the Dev team to come up with unique looks for each class. and they better swear to all the powers that they don't screw it up like they did that pathetic excuse for a paladin class hat.But I'll also agree that a Sai, by the very nature of the weapon, should be monk/brusier and maybe scout only.

None of what you used as example (save shields) is style, only paintjob.  Kites and Towers used to be separate btw.

Telling me my SK should have some cheesy black and skull motif armor is the same as me telling monks they should be happy with a stock leather BP with Bruce Lee's picture on it.   I quite enjoy being Joan of Anthrax in my polished city armor and sparkly white horse.  Nothing paladinish at all about it, I'm wearing it.

Throwing a paintjob on a set of stock armor does not make the distinctive (yet varied) look Monks got.  Period

If I can wear a finger wigglers robe.. there is no reason I cant wear a cropped top and pants.  None.  People should have the freedom, beyond class sets, to choose a look that suits them.  Me fighting in a cropped top and pants is no more incredulous than me fighting in a dress or formal gown, both allowable.

And to play the IRL card, I can walk over to my husbands safe right now, equip a belt and holster and colt just fine.  I can even handle one.  Equipping is nothing without the skills to use the stupid stuff.  I can go to the first county fair here and buy a crap import sai from one of the people who will sell one to anybody with a parents sig or an ID, wave it around, hold it, use it to plant flowers if I want regardless of any "purists" opinions.

Im a little sick of the Kung Fu crowd pointing at anything remotely asian martial arts and saying "mine mine mine".  They have more than any other class already.  I see no need for them to be grabbing past what they already have.

[Wolphin]

Lasai wrote:

The game isn't real life.  The look is just that, a look.

It isnt even new.  Just player craftable.  I was looting bloodstained Sai in CL when I started the game.  They have been on NPC vendors forever.

Monks have been pandered to looks wise enough in this game, far more than any other class as far as distinctive weapons and armor only usable by them.

There is absolutely no "real world" justification for the psuedo Gi as implemented in this game, and I for one am very happy some of them are finally being recognized for what they are in t8, nothing more than alternative graphic armor.

Stat em for monks, fine.  Make them exclusive, no. 

No other class archetype has any distinctive Playermade items at all.  There is not a single Player made item, armor or weapon, that distinctively announces my Assassin as a Predator, nor can I think of any other archetype (save monks) that has a defining look.

I don't see any justification to denying this weapon to other classes based on its graphic appearance.  No single class should claim ownership of a look.

1) Just because you were looting them at the start of the game, doesn't mean they shouldn't have been brawler useable then or now.2) Yes, because that hood your assassin is wearing in your signature can be worn by everyone and doesn't easily identify your character as a predator... so everyone should be able to run around in pointy wizard hats? and i know i would sure like one of my characters to be able to wear one of them flashy swashy hats with the feather even though he isn't one

[Wolphin]

To a certain extent, not many of the weapon choices have to do with RL but what those classes could use in traditional D&D... why do furies and wardens use scimitars and like swords? because they could in D&D... why are shamans able to use spears? because they could in D&D... why can't templars or inquisitors use bladed weapons? because the generic cleric in D&D couldn't, they were restricted to crushing weapons... why are most mage weapons either a type of dagger, staff or one handed rod/wand type weapon? you got it, because that is what they used in D&D... now while any class could pick up a weapon and use it, they were not as good with them or they lost abilities due to religion, etc... now, if we are going to go by what alot of the original weapon restrictions in eq were based on, sais in d&d were useable by monks normally and other classes could use it if they took a special feat to use an exotic weapon...

[Bloodfa]

I'm sorry Lasai, but in respect to the weapon, not just appearance, in its' simple use, you're way off.  Take your husbands colt, strap it on, then put on a metal gauntlet.  How do you expect to pull the trigger?  It just won't fit.  That's one of the points I'm trying to make.  And ironically, you proved the point somewhat.  You could walk around with Sais.  Might look cool on your toon.  But you wouldn't be able to pull them out without flinging them across the field while wearing metal gloves, even chainmail.  You certainly wouldn't be able to anything except use them as a dagger with no blades. 

[Echgar]

You might get lucky, but just a note with the title of this thread, it is usually a bad idea to address a thread to one or all developers.  As stated in the forum rules:

Threads addressed to a "Red Name" or "devs." If we responded to them, then you would see hundreds of posts trying to get our attention this way. Threads with a name in the title will almost never see an official response.

Just trying to help.

[Aull]

Thanks for pointing that out Echgar. Keep on helping us! Much appreciated.

[ShinGoku]

Wow, Monks and bruisers get a couple of gi that no one else can equip...I don't really call that pandered to.  As a plate tank you have a huuuuuge range of armors, shields and weapons, as brawlers we don't get a wide range at all.In the RoK expansion there are now gi and rice hats that anyone at all can use so we don't even get the exclusive look anymore.

[Bloodfa]

Errrr, thanks for pointing that out, Echgar.  Kind of a dopey mistake on my part, since I should know better from living on the PvP forums.

Could you re-title the thread to read as "I've got a question regarding one of the new weapons. The Sai."? 

[Lodrelhai]

I admit that my original argument for fighting batons being given fighter stats was based entirely on the fact that the twin fighting stick look, to me, is a quintessential 'monk' look.  And it's got the fighter stats, and I'm glad, because now my ww main can look forward to giving them to my monk alt when she levels.However, having the stats be favorable to a particular class is severely different from making them ONLY for that class.  Monk/bruisers already have the katar, the claws, the knuckles, and the fistwraps which are exclusive to them.  Brawlers are the only class that can get a bare-hands appearance before T7, and a gi look before T8.  I see no reason to limit the use of any item to a particular class because its look is more traditional to that class.  Then again, I'm all for opening appearance slots to any armor, regardless of whether that class can actually equip it or not.  But I digress.I agree that the weapon should be opened to monks and bruisers as an equipment choice.  Obviously they can use 1hp weapons because they have the katar.  But limited only to them?  IMHO, no.

[mr23sgte]

Sorry for the necro, but does anyone know which weapons have the Sai graphic and will Monks be able to equip these in the appearance slot on TEST currently???

[EvilAstroboy]

Wolphin wrote:

Lasai wrote:

The game isn't real life.  The look is just that, a look.

It isnt even new.  Just player craftable.  I was looting bloodstained Sai in CL when I started the game.  They have been on NPC vendors forever.

Monks have been pandered to looks wise enough in this game, far more than any other class as far as distinctive weapons and armor only usable by them.

There is absolutely no "real world" justification for the psuedo Gi as implemented in this game, and I for one am very happy some of them are finally being recognized for what they are in t8, nothing more than alternative graphic armor.

Stat em for monks, fine.  Make them exclusive, no. 

No other class archetype has any distinctive Playermade items at all.  There is not a single Player made item, armor or weapon, that distinctively announces my Assassin as a Predator, nor can I think of any other archetype (save monks) that has a defining look.

I don't see any justification to denying this weapon to other classes based on its graphic appearance.  No single class should claim ownership of a look.

1) Just because you were looting them at the start of the game, doesn't mean they shouldn't have been brawler useable then or now.2) Yes, because that hood your assassin is wearing in your signature can be worn by everyone and doesn't easily identify your character as a predator... so everyone should be able to run around in pointy wizard hats? and i know i would sure like one of my characters to be able to wear one of them flashy swashy hats with the feather even though he isn't one

Clearly youve never heard of Station Cash or Legends of Norrath. From LoN you can get the box of classless hats which let you wear any class hat as an appearance item. Theres a wizard, bezerker and troubador hat already on Station Cash armor sets. Not to mention numerous class hats are being used as TSO dungeon drops usable by many classes. So no, no class has ownership of a look and probably never will due to a lack of models available.

[Kokus]

Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote:

I've got a question and some feedback regarding the addition of the Sai as a weapon.

The sai has been in the game as a weapon from the very beginning.  It just hasn't been used much recently.  My favorite was the old T5 contested Vicious Sai.  Was the best Assassin weapon in the game in T5.

[Ishkur]

Hereo@Unrest wrote:

Sorry for the necro, but does anyone know which weapons have the Sai graphic and will Monks be able to equip these in the appearance slot on TEST currently???

It would be better to start a new thread asking this question than necro an old thread. People don't realize it's old and start arguing over old, dead points made in the thread. (e.g. See the two posts follwwing yours.)

[Konahito]

Yikes!

/gets our the shovel to properly rebury this thread again.

It would definitely be better to start a new thread asking for this, and the Items and Equipment forum might be a better fit now that sai have been in game for a while now.

Thanks!