Hattori clan. Why?

I played old shogun for years and never really bored me. Than, being more like a SP person I played historical accurate modes of the series.

I was thrilled when I heard about Shougun2 and I thought that CA/Sega choose a remake in order to remove to the mistakes made by ETW and NTW. But now I read here and there Hattori. What's this? It's confirmed? What is that, such a clan in this game?

I understand you have ninja warriors monks but the whole ninja clan?It is just a secondary clan? If is one of the main clans, I think is ridiculous

Its a bonus for the limited and above editions only.

Its just for fun, and not in the normal, base, campaign.

An ahistorical addition to a CA game?? Surely, you must be joking.

No seriously, I dont think the Hattori are a problem. 10 playable Factions are a bit of a low number when you consider how many actual factions there were in the 1550's in feudal Japan. But the 10/11 seem ok for the game. Not too many, but enough so that you have options.

Hmm Hattori I wonder if this anything to do with the character of Hattori Hanzo from the Kill Bill movies

edit seems they do have a commonality Hattori Hanzō

Maybe it's also a minor clan in the game that starts out with very little resources? One that's very hard to win the campaign with.

The Oda clan was pretty small at first too, as well as the Tokugawa (became shogun). I don't think either could have ever become much if Imagawa wasn't killed.

Given the frequent rises from absolute obscurity during the Sengoku Jidai, it is fair to say that if the game starts from its outset, ANY clan could have a run for greatness. The Hattori were a clan, they could theoretically have become major, just like the Hôjô, Môri, Oda, Matsudaira (later Tokugawa) etc. To be fair, none of the clans who were great towards the end of the Sengoku Jidai were great at its outset.

Also take the house of Toyotomi as a striking example, before Toyotomi Hideyoshi, who became Kampaku, virtually shogun and undisputed leader of Japan, there was no Toyotomi clan at all. He rose by his own means through the ranks of the Oda clan and carried on Nobunaga's legacy when he was murdered.

This is one of the most fascinating aspects of this time and place, that even in such a fairly rigid and feudal society, a man who was one day nothing could later become a great general and ruler, and it is a perfect pretext for a game of this sort.

So I don't really have a gripe with the addition of the Hattori clan, even thought I'm quite read up on japanese history. I only wish they'd throw in more underdogs for us to fight our way up with, and not just specifically one leaned towards subterfuge. Althought I understand that's super intense and all, thus a good selling-point.

Good point Revolting. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, Toyotomi was the son of a pesant and rose up through the ranks to become the Supreme Military Ruler. He was not granted the title of Shogun because the Emperor couldnt give that title to a man who came from peasant stock. Like the British Monarchy the Japanese Emperor was a figurehead but still had to grant official titles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Hmm Hattori I wonder if this anything to do with the character of Hattori Hanzo from the Kill Bill movies

edit seems they do have a commonality Hattori Hanzō

---

On a similar note, I look forward to playing as this clan while quoting Hanzo Hattori from Samurai Warriors.

"This war will be won in the shadows..."

Hattori was not ruler of Iga but was a clan amongst other little clans originating from that province. they were retainers and and that's all. Finally he was a Tokugawa retainer

same with Hideyoshi, he was an Oda retainer and formed his own clan only after the death of Nobunaga based on Nobunaga clan. Actually Hideyoshi's clan was Oda without the generals that rebelled against him.

So Hattori was not a clan with enough resources to raise to power by their own means and Hideyoshi was actually the ruler of ex-Oda clan. I don't think that this has something to do with the origin of generals/conquerors

You don't get it. This was an age and place where the value of your land and your status mattered little. What mattered was what you did with what you had. Let's count the famous and prominent clans who started as minor retainers of other clans, or shared a province with many others:

Oda, started as quite minor retainers of the Shiba clan. They didn't even hold the whole of Owari for themselves.

Hôjô, started of as unsignificant retainers of the Imagawa and went on to carve out a great territory on the Kanto plain.

Môri, at the outset of the SJ, a minor clan from Aki province, which they shared with many other clans (many like the Kikkawa and Kobayakawa later became their vassals). They were alternatingly vassals and allies of their more powerful neighbours and managed to stay alive by picking the right side.

Matsudaira, later Tokugawa, one of many clans originating from Mikawa, sharing a similar history with the Môri in making the province their own over time and turning many of their close neighbours into vassals. They however survived by submitting themselves as vassals to the Imagawa with whom they were at war, to spare their clan from destruction.

Chosokabe, one of the Tosa clans who in conflict with their neighbours nearly got destroyed themselves. Only Chosokabe Kunichika survived under the protection of the Ichijô, to later reestablish his clan and eclipse his protectors.

Miyoshi, went from a minor Hosokawa vassal and climbed their former overlords bloodied back to control much of central Japan and the shogunate.

The Amako, great rivals of the Ôuchi and Môri, entered the Onin war as minor Kyogoku vassals, but were expelled and did not establish themselves independently until the early 16th century.

To be fair, let's also add the Takeda because, while Kai was more or less their province, by 1507 when Shingens father inherited, the province was split between them and many former vassals who had broken free. Only through a lifetime of bloody wars did Nobutora manage to unite Kai again, and had he not been one of those brilliant and ruthless leaders, the Takeda would've shared fate with the Hosokawa, Ôuchi, Shiba, Shôni and many others. Who were they? Greater clans who became splintered between their vassals and later eclipsed by one of them, or overthrown by one in particular.

Of the above, let's mention the Shôni for instance, who lost grip due to incompetent leadership and was eventually challenged and overthrown by their vassals the Ryûzôji. I mention them not only because they have a cool name, but because their leader Takanobu was one crazy dog and one of the 3 major contestants for hegemony over Kyûshû. Before the Ryûzôji overthrew their masters they were just one of many vassals.

...I could go on for quite a while, but the clans to mention will become less and less famous. Even so, many of them were significant in their time and could've carried their name further. So, does the Hattori not deserve a place just because they were one of many clans from a relatively poor province? If that's the case let's scratch the Hôjô too, because they didn't have any land at all when Ise Shinkuro (later Hôjô Soun) entered the service of Imagawa Yoshitada. Should we scratch the Hattori because they became retainers of another clan? lol, then let's scratch all samurai there has ever been, especially those famous ones of the Sengoku Jidai. ;)

The reason why the Hattori (or any of their neighbours) didn't become greater was most likely because no clan of Iga ever tried to unite the other local clans under them, instead they formed a defensive league. Had the province been united they would've been most capable to fight at least the clans east and south of them, and expand on their expense. It's just that they didn't follow such a path, but that doesn't mean they couldn't, or that the player won't. When Oda Nobunaga attacked Iga for the second time (his son was first repulsed), they managed to muster about 5000 men in its defense. That's a quite capable army, and with the right leadership it could've become a war-winning force in the region, had they only started early. Just remember the disparity in numbers at the battle of Okehazama, or Okinawate, it's all about leadership and timing.

Add Uesugi in there as well, they didn't have Echigo for themselves.

I don't get what's the problem with Hattori. I for one can't wait to play with them since they're so insignificant compared to the big clans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edyzmedieval

Add Uesugi in there as well, they didn't have Echigo for themselves.

I don't get what's the problem with Hattori. I for one can't wait to play with them since they're so insignificant compared to the big clans.

---

Uesugi had maybe the most grazy history of all mentioned before. The late Uesugi who we identify with Uesugi Kenshin was more or less infact Nagao Clan who only adopted the Uesugi name from the last Yamanouchi Uesugi Lord who was forced to adopt his own vassal, then Nagao Kagetora because he was being so utterly defeated by the Late Hojo Clan. The new Nagao/ Uesugi inherited some of Yamanouchi Uesugi´s resources from Kozuke province, but mainly all they got from Uesugi proper was the name, prestige and the office of Kanto Kanrei, which had been held by Yamanouchi Uesugi for an bit.

The Uesugi Clan proper is far less known then the late Uesugi under Kenshin. Originally it was composed of three branch families, namely, Yamanouchi, Ogigayatsu and Inukake Uesugi branches. While during the Muromachi period as part of Ashikaga Shogunate these three families held provinces of Echigo,Kozuke, Musashi and Sagami, maiking it immensely powerful in theory.They were in constant state of civil war, which resulted the Inukake branch going extinct already before the Sengoku Jidai period started.
While the Uesugi branches were busy fighting themselves and the Ashikaga Shogunate for the rule of Kanto, the minor Imagawa vassal Ise Shinkuro, which revolting friendship already mentioned started his campaign to carve out a domain on the lands of Uesugi, mainly the Ogigayatsu at the start. He was successful in his attempts and while he never took the name his son Ujitsuna adopted the name Hojo. So the sengoku period Hojo was did not have any relations with the Old Hojo Clan who ruled the Kamakura Shogunate for a long time and defeated the Mongol invasions. Finally 1545 Hojo Ujiyasu the Grandson of Ise Shinkuro, posthumously named Hojo Soun, dealt decisive blow to the both existing brnaches of the Uesugi at the battle of Kawagoe. This battle ultimately also caused for Uesugi Norimasa, the leader of Yamanouchi Uesugi to seek shelter from his Nagao vassals of Echigo in 1551 after loosing more batles to the "new" Hojo Clan.

Replaying history often means that the player has to win certain missions: over and over again until he wins it and can move on to the next step.

The other approach is to present a starting point from history with all its possibilities and then wait what comes out of it. It doesn't matter whether you win or lose that known key battle (if it ever happens), there will be another day.

http://www.samurai-archives.com/maphome.html

I was looking to those maps and I see no Hattori clan. They played a minor role and featuring them in the game is like creating a Robin Hood clan in MTW2

I am not contesting that were humble origin samurais that become very powerful but if you look at the maps starting from 1525 you'll observe that most clans survived in a way or another. It's a strategy game, not a role play game. I am trying to say that even if the clans were lead by rulers that were not exactly rightful heirs but rose to power based on their own skill, this does not mean that it is a new clan. even Hideyoshi based his power on Oda remnants. Applying Revolting logic it would be absolutly normal to have an Akechi clan because he also has its chance to become a big daimyo.

There are only 9 playable factions and were chosen from ones that survived until late XVI century and were also constituted in a way or another at the start of the period.

I remember about the old Shogun and the battlefield ninja provoked a lot of discussions around here. Suddenly a clan with battlefield ninja seem appropriate. It would be much nicer to give to Koga and Iga a special feature that will enabling a recruitment of ninja, generals prone to ninja-like operations and so on than create a whole clan. Or you can recruit wandering ninja/ronins from Iga/Koga and make them retainers. It is just marketing, that's why I am a little annoyed. On this logic I would say to add an Ikko-Ikki clan or maybe two because monks also have their chance to gain power in medieval Japan. Also a imperial clan for variety.

It's a game about warlords and Hattori was just a retainer, he, his ancestors and his heirs.

Now back to Hattori, I think that more interesting will be to have a higher number of civil wars and enable to create clans lead by a powerful generals. For example, my daimyo is young and stupid but the clan has a high stats general. The young boy is doing a mistake. The established general/retainer is annoyed and decide to take over the clan. You can choose to back up the inept heir and prove that he is worthy or you can choose to back up the general/retainer. And so on.

What I am trying to say is that there are other priorities for creating a good game than just throw Japan's Robin Hood in the game and tell to buyers that wow they have the chance to be homo novus of Sengoku Era. There are other ways more subtle to re-create the atmosphere and add some role playing features to this game.

Quote:

---

You don't get it.

---

Please don't bother yourself to give me history lessons. I am practicing ninjutsu and I am interested in Japan history since 1993 so make a count.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TosaInu

The other approach is to present a starting point from history with all its possibilities and then wait what comes out of it. It doesn't matter whether you win or lose that known key battle (if it ever happens), there will be another day.

---

I agree completley. Chosokabe, christian Shimazu or Mori can be the unifier of Japan or shogun. But a ninja clan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler

I agree completley. Chosokabe, christian Shimazu or Mori can be the unifier of Japan or shogun. But a ninja clan?

---

But Shimazu Clan was not Christian. ;) I agree that Hattori was rather obscure and never rose to anything other then being Tokugawa vassal, but maybe the problem here is similar to the naming convention of the agents.The faction is simply Hattori Clan because the name is somewhat known, while for example Iga Monto would be a better and more historically accurate name,which the faction is quite likely meant to represent in reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

But Shimazu Clan was not Christian. ;)

---

Yeah, Otomo and Omura were christians, but I said like that thinking to the game and that the most southern clan is much more interested to convert to christianity than let's say Date or Uesugi due to commerce with christians.;)

Quote:

---

I was looking to those maps and I see no Hattori clan. They played a minor role...

---

Depending on what date you look at, all clans are minor at some point, retainers at some point. Just because a clan played a minor role historically doesn't mean that must be so in an alternate time-line. That's what these games are about, recreating history.

Quote:

---

but if you look at the maps starting from 1525 you'll observe that most clans survived in a way or another.

---

Depends up to what point you're reffering to. Few of the names present on that map survived as daimyô past the unification, but it's true that most clans survived in some way.

Quote:

---

It's a strategy game, not a role play game.

---

If I've understood CA correctly, it's going to be a little bit of both? And I certainly don't mind that.

Quote:

---

this does not mean that it is a new clan. even Hideyoshi based his power on Oda remnants. Applying Revolting logic it would be absolutly normal to have an Akechi clan because he also has its chance to become a big daimyo.

---

No that's exactly what it does mean, and yes the game should work like that if it were to properly model the sengoku jidai. If they add at least one clan where one can preform the iconic sengoku act of gekokujô, I'm totally happy about that one oppertunity, and that's why I'm not gnashing my teeth over the addition of a "ninja-clan". I'd love for CA to pour in another 40 minor clans figuring as vassals and retainers of the bigger ones, because that would make Shogun 2 more Sengoku Jidai. Do you catch my drift? The problem isn't that they added 1 small clan, the problem is that they didn't add more.

Quote:

---

It's a game about warlords and Hattori was just a retainer, he, his ancestors and his heirs.

---

And the most typical, outstanding and interesting sengoku-warlords were those who rose from obscurity and internal conflict and carved out a destiny for themselves. This is how I want to play this game, that's why this issue doesn't bother me.

Quote:

---

Please don't bother yourself to give me history lessons. I am practicing ninjutsu and I am interested in Japan history since 1993 so make a count.

---

What matters is not what you do in your spare time but what arguments you bring to the table. I can't give heed to your knowledge if I feel your arguments are flawed. The reasons why Hattori shouldn't be added into the game isn't because they were a "ninja"-clan, or a small clan, or never were independent, the only reason if any should be that there are no other clans of similar stature represented, as a case of fairness to all the other smalltimers. I think this is kind of a silly reason, and as previously stated I'd rather have 1 than none, and if it's the black PJ-squad, fine. I don't care. I don't have to train shuriken-hurlers if I don't want to.