Tome of Battle classes without the extras

dagger · Nov 15, 2006

Crusader/Warblade

I was looking over these two classes today and with some adjustments they would make decent base classes without maneuvers/stance rules.

What do you think?

A few of the powers would have to be adjusted somewhat…………like the 20th level power of Warblade.

dog45 · Nov 15, 2006

You could, I suppose. I'd throw some bonus feats in there to compensate though.

Why would you do it though? You think they're not balanced?

dagger · Nov 15, 2006

I'm not worried about the balance, mainly because I have not seen them played yet. I just worry adding even more mechanics could complicate things and slow the game down further.

I also just think they would make very cool base classes...

dog45 · Nov 15, 2006

I've played with them, and its just a matter of reading the rules beforehand. Make sure you and your DM (or are you the DM?) understand how the martial adept classes work. I'm a big fan of them, and I don't think it's difficult to incorporate in games.

An easy way to introduce them is to have players or NPC's take the Martial Study feats, so they can learn a single manuever or stance. Once you get the hang of manuevers, then go fullbore on them.

edit: yes, i think if you took out the manuevers/stances they would still be interesting classes. I mean, crusdaer/warblade - full bab w/ decent skills. throw in a few special abilities and thats better than the fighter already.

NilesB · Nov 15, 2006

dagger said:
What do you think?

No.

Mouseferatu · Nov 15, 2006

NilesB said:
No.

I have to agree. It's pretty much like playing a cleric or a wizard without spellcasting.

dog45 · Nov 15, 2006

Mouseferatu said:
I have to agree. It's pretty much like playing a cleric or a wizard without spellcasting.

I initially thought that. But it's not. If a cleric or wizard loses their spellcasting, the wizard is totally screwed. A cleric at least has heavy armor, 3/4 bab, and 2 good saves.

A warblade with no manuevers/stances, has full bab, d12 HD, 4 bonus feats, uncanny dodge, weapon aptitude, and 5 INT synergy abilities (none of which require manuvers/stances). oh yeah - and 4 skill points and an okay skill list.

edit: granted - they go back down to "might as well play a fighter" in terms of power level versus spellcasters, but they wouldn't be worthless.

Mouseferatu · Nov 15, 2006

dog45 said:
I initially thought that. But it's not. If a cleric or wizard loses their spellcasting, the wizard is totally screwed. A cleric at least has heavy armor, 3/4 bab, and 2 good saves.

A warblade with no manuevers/stances, has full bab, d12 HD, 4 bonus feats, uncanny dodge, weapon aptitude, and 5 INT synergy abilities (none of which require manuvers/stances). oh yeah - and 4 skill points and an okay skill list.

edit: granted - they go back down to "might as well play a fighter" in terms of power level versus spellcasters, but they wouldn't be worthless.

Right, I didn't mean to imply that they'd be worthless, per se. You're certainly correct that they can still hold their own. But frankly, I just don't see why anyone would bother. The whole point to these guys is the maneuver system, after all.

(And without meaning to start up the debate again, I don't think these guys are equivalent to fighters when you strip away the maneuvers, since I still maintain that a well-built fighter is equal, or at least close to equal, with a crusader or warblade with maneuvers.)

dog45 · Nov 15, 2006

Mouseferatu said:
Right, I didn't mean to imply that they'd be worthless, per se. You're certainly correct that they can still hold their own. But frankly, I just don't see why anyone would bother. The whole point to these guys is the maneuver system, after all.

(And without meaning to start up the debate again, I don't think these guys are equivalent to fighters when you strip away the maneuvers, since I still maintain that a well-built fighter is equal, or at least close to equal, with a crusader or warblade with maneuvers.)

I agree with your first part. Don't feel like getting into your second part now. Tired. Must sleep.

Kae'Yoss · Nov 15, 2006

Mouseferatu said:
I have to agree. It's pretty much like playing a cleric or a wizard without spellcasting.

Exactly! Not that a cleric couldn't survive without his spells, and noone's implying that.

But getting to cast spells is the whole point of playing a wizard, and a cleric without spells might as well play a paladin, they get more HP, a better BAB, better saves if you consider divine grace, and so on.

Tome of Battle classes without the extras

dagger

Adventurer

dog45

First Post

dagger

Adventurer

dog45

First Post

NilesB

First Post

Mouseferatu

Hero

dog45

First Post

Mouseferatu

Hero

dog45

First Post

Kae'Yoss

First Post

Similar Threads