D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Shadowlord build (NO TOME OF BATTLE)

[jokeaccount]

Hi,

I'm trying to make a shadowlord build for an on going campaign but i'm having some trouble finding some interesting teaks. I am Fighter 2/Rog 5 and going for the shadowalker template (it is required) next level and at lvl 9 i will probably be lvl 1 shadowlord. I was thinking of just dropping all the next levels to shadowlord class till its lvl 6 but then what... And also from what i've read most people take the shadowlord class till much later (after they stuff like assassins and whatnot).
So yeah my question is: Should i go immediately for shadowlord or take some other stuff first to compliment his abilities? Also note that the DM does NOT allow tome of battle (he considers it too overpowered for 3.5) so the Sword Sage antics and Shadowjaunt-like abilites for multiple pounces are not allowed. I think he allows tome of arcana though (or w/e its called).

Thanks in advance!

 

[Dandu]

You should take levels in Shadowdancer, naturally. It is a great prestige class with many fun and flavorful abilities for a shadow themed character. Like a monk, the players of the Shadowdancer always has something to look forward to when he gains another level in the class.

 

[jokeaccount]

Yes but i will be losing attack bonus (since the shadow dancer has the worst AB growth) and the DM told me that in the long run this will show and it will be really hard to hit opponents who will naturally have higher AC since we will be higher lvl... I had thought of shadowdancer and hide in plain sight ability but the AB thing made me rethink...

 

[Dandu]

You have activated my trap card, in America!

Yeah, you might have noticed I was being tongue in cheek about that.

Can't think of much to help you. The Darkstalker feat seems thematically appropriate; perhaps you should look there?

It's too bad ToB is out. There's a lot of support for this kind of character there.

Is your DM amiable to discourse on this? From a mechanical point of view, ToB lies roughly in the middle of the DnD power scale, above Monks, Fighters, and Paladins, but below Wizards, Clerics, and Druids. It's not too powerful for DnD, though it might be too powerful for his game, in the same way that my roommate's chili makes me cry despite being only moderately spicy.

 

[jokeaccount]

Well he cannot accept the ToB classes that have ridiculous abilities with those stances and maneuvers (which from what i've seen are pretty OP imo but don't know if they're better than a wizard although he says they are...). Anyway i thought that i might make him allow ToB if you can make me a build that does not use OP abilites or does not go THAT far in the sword sage build where the "Does 100 dmg without DC" abilities are... I'll check it out also

 

[Dandu]

I'm not that good at ToB, but I'll look around for this ToB guide that I saw a while back.

In the meantime, I could talk about how ToB is less powerful than a full spellcaster, if you want.

 

[jokeaccount]

Well for that you should talk to the DM. What he basically can't accept is that a melee class gets to do stuff out of their nature and closer to wizards. The maneuver damage and the ability to do them again and again without a daily restriction is what irritates him. He is of the opinion that a fighter even though he can't put out as much burst as a mage class still outputs more damage in the long run since he can attack non stop whereas a wizard has to prepare the spells use them and then he can't do sheit after that.

 

[Dandu]

Here's the ToB guide. Turns out I was googling the wrong title for a bit. I also found a Guide to Stealthy Characters, which I think you will find useful.

The following consists of things in response to your post
[sblock]

Well for that you should talk to the DM.

Not sure that's possible for a man in my position .

What he basically can't accept is that a melee class gets to do stuff out of their nature and closer to wizards.

Yeah... we call it Fighters Can't Have Nice Things syndrome.

Kinda an odd argument though. Paladins get spells and Monks get spell-like abilities. Fighters can take feats (from the PHB2) to light their fists on fire.

The maneuver damage and the ability to do them again and again without a daily restriction is what irritates him.

You may find this useful if you need to talk to him: doing 100 damage in 1 strike seems powerful, but at level 20, a well built strength based melee character should be able to exceed that on a full attack. Some charging based builds can hit that number at around level 12 on a charge. It's not really as bad as it seems.

He is of the opinion that a fighter even though he can't put out as much burst as a mage class still outputs more damage in the long run since he can attack non stop whereas a wizard has to prepare the spells use them and then he can't do sheit after that.

That is how the designers thought, but I do not think the game agrees with that point of view. If you wish to talk to him, this analogy may be helpful.

It is not the pole vaulter who can vault all day who wins the Olympics, but the one who can leap over the bar, even if it is only a few times per day.

Having infinite attacks is great but they have to be capable of affecting the enemy to matter, and most of the time a fighter won't unless he's very well built. And I mean very. As in, with 18 levels of Warblade.

This isn't just my opinion. Pretty much the entire reputable population of WotC's character optimization forum hold it, and they're the people who figure out ways to break the game for fun.

Honestly not sure if words will convince him. Maybe you should get a neutral party to DM a game and invite your current DM to play a ToB character in it while you play... a Druid?
[/sblock]

 

[Empirate]

On Shadowlords in general:

You're feat-starved, so play a Human or Strongheart Halfling. Mixing in a Fighter level or two might be OK (or some Monk variants).

TWF is important, and natural attacks if you can get them - your Shadow Pounce ability is where the power of the Shadowlord kicks in, so making as many attacks as possible (all with that sneak attack bonus damage) is nice.

Depending on your DM, teleportation effects might count as movement. In this case, going off a Scout/Ranger base instead of a Rogue base (for skirmish damage instead of sneak attack) makes the bonus damage more reliable, and gives you an AC boost to boot. The Improved Skirmish and Swift Hunter feats will do wonders for your BAB and damage output.

Quicken Spell-like Ability is a very good feat so you can Shadowpounce multiple times per round. Really good for going nova on more than one enemy at a time.

Get thyself Truedeath crystals on your weapons (and generally do everything possible to make crit-immune monsters non-sneak attack-immune). Swift Hunter helps out here, as well.

Playing a Shadar-Kai might be an interesting option thematically (and mechanically). Huge bonus to Dex and small one to Con, improved Low-Light Vision, stupidly high racial Hide bonus, and Hide in Plain Sight. Costs a bit LA though, and you're already strapped for feats...

 

[jokeaccount]

Arg sorry forgot to mention the campaign is ongoing so i'm already human with dodge mobility spring att, blindfight (requirements) and i got TWF.

The thing is, that i JUST talked to the DM and except from ToB what he does not accept is multiple "full-round requiring actions" in one round. "How can a character do 2 or 3 full round actions in 1 round. It is not physically possible when a round is 4 seconds for the character to do things that would otherwise take 12 seconds". In other words, he considers shadow-pounce a ROUND ENDER ability even if the means of teleportation used before that was a swift action or w/e. Help me argue against that please!