Book of Nine Swords -- okay?

[moritheil]

My general feeling, since you asked, is that this falls along the same lines as Magic of Incarnum (and, for that matter Psionics); If you allow into your game, your campaign should have a place for these powers - NPCs, bad guys, monsters, history, background, etc. The problem with inserting into an existing campaign is that, assuming you have an established background and direction, you must change this for the powers represented in the book.

Very well-put. Metaphysical conflict is why Psionics are generally allowed in my campaigns but Incarnum is generally not.

 

[Xyvs]

Love the book

I really like Nine Swords. But I also am a huge fan of martial arts. But I agree with previous posters that there is a lot in this book that isn't martial arts inspired. The Crusader and the powers in devoted spirit and white raven are perfect examples. It's a great martial-type bard/marshal hybrid.

I've never liked the supposition that D&D has to be Western and that any "Eastern" seeming elements do not belong. My main homebrew campaign includes Asian-type empires alongside traditional Western ones.

But the stuff in Nine Swords that is clearly martial arts (I feel) is really well integrated. WotC even took out all the overt Asian martial arts references specifically for the martial arts-haters.

EDIT: Did want to mention that I was surprised to see ftr BAB, d12 hp, and ftr feats for the Warblade. That alone seems very strong. Then add in the maneuvers and special abilities and I can't see why anyone wouldnt play Warblade over Fighter. I would almost change the Aptitude ability so that you calculate the Warblade's ftr level as -4 or -6, not -2. Letting the Warblade get some of the Fighter's uber feats from PHB2 is a bit much.

 

[Felon]

Lets be fair, this is an ability that is equal (more or less) to a 9th level spell. The system is a parallel system to the vancian 9 level magic system with (essentially) 9 levels of maneuvers. The lower level maneuvers are comparible to your general single-target caster spells of similiar levels.

Indeed, fairness is my objective. But comparing the damage output of a warrior class that gets d10 or d12 hit dice and a host of other cool combat abilities to a 9th level spell cast by a class that gets 1d4 HD, terrible BAB, arcane spell failure in armor, and basically sells the farm to get a solid damage output, and saying "that's equivalent" does not strike me at all as fair.

EDIT--Oh freaking hell, I almost forgot to point out that the caster is burning a slot that he only gets one of per day, while Nine-Sword munchkin gets all his slots back between battles--or even in the middle of a battle. For the warblade, it's almost literally a snap of the fingers. So, another overwhelming benefit that blows away the notion of fairness.

Sweet Christmas, so broken. Disciplines pack the sheer power of an arcanist spell with the omnipresent utility of a feat.

Not only do I think it's balanced...

Kinda disappointing, Mouse, since I had placed some faith in your judgment. See above.

Like many folks, I'm just boggled at how the Warblade made the editing cut with its bevy of Int-bonus class features, maximum hit dice, generous skill points, bonus feats, and over-the-top damage output every four rounds out of five or so. If anyone was looking for the cavalier of 3e, look no farther.

Ah well, it's one less book for me to buy, and as Book of Excessive Deeds is the only other book for me to flat-out ban, I guess WotC's is still batting a damn good average.

 

[brehobit]

Thanks for the answers folkd, I just went out and bought this.

I've by no means gotten a complete understanding of the book, but let me say:

Dude this is so overpowered I can't believe it.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

A first level crusader has the following abilities (always useable)
d10 hit die, 4 skill points/level (fair list), good fort save, full BAB. In addition he delays 5 points of damage one round. Any round he gets hit, he gets +1 attack and +1 damage. Finally, he can make it so that everytime he hits an opponent (one who isn't exactly the same alignment) he can heal any one character of 2 points of damage (martial spirit, a stance). At this point the character is about as powerful and versital as the current 1st level warrior: the barbarian. (Barb as 2 more hit points, better skill list, +10 movement and rage once/day vs the delayed damage, +1/+1 bonus and healing). But the Cursader still hasn't tapped his biggest power: his maneuvers.

At 5th level, let's take the swordsage as an example. Medium BAB, d8 hit points good ref and will saves, 6 skill points with a good/very good list. He gets a free weapon focus (minor restrictions on weapon). He gets to add his wisdom bonus to his AC (with light armor or less) and damage (again minor weapons restrictions). +2 on initiative. If small (halfing or gnome), take +2 attack and +4 damage against anything medium sized and larger (Stance). Or if you prefer just deal 5 points of flame damage to anyone that is next to you and hits you. Finally, once per fight, if he hits his opponent he does an extra 6d6 fire damage to him. IN ADDITION his opponent explodes in a burst (usually 10'+ radium) for the same 6d6 damage. Only once per battle, but still... And he has lots of other options/powers to play with.

Dude. I'm stopping there. Warrior classes, IME, are not at all weak at lower levels (say 6 on down). And these two examples show a great deal of power at low levels compared to a normal warrior.

OK, end of rant. Does anyone feel differently about these two (hasty) examples?


Mark

 

[Greg K]

I put the book back on the shelf after looking at it for fifteen to twenty minutes. I found the classes and mechanics to not only be inappropriate for my current game, but also not what I am looking to use for my next campaign which is inspired by certain anime and wuxia.

 

[Felon]

Thanks for the answers folkd, I just went out and bought this.

I've by no means gotten a complete understanding of the book, but let me say:

Dude this is so overpowered I can't believe it.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

Yeah, but unfortunately...you bought the book. As far as Richard Baker, Matt Sernett, and Frank Brunner are considered, it's game over.

At 5th level, let's take the swordsage as an example. Medium BAB, d8 hit points good ref and will saves, 6 skill points with a good/very good list. He gets a free weapon focus (minor restrictions on weapon). He gets to add his wisdom bonus to his AC (with light armor or less) and damage (again minor weapons restrictions).

Gah.

Sory, I meant to say....GAHH! With emphasis.

Monks, please, it's time to get organized and write your senators...

OK, end of rant. Does anyone feel differently about these two (hasty) examples?

Well, it's a fairly indefensible position, requiring someone with a willingness to dig in their heels and blot out wave after wave of prima facie evidence...so yes, plenty of folks will line up to disagree.

 

[Xyvs]

EDIT--Oh freaking hell, I almost forgot to point out that the caster is burning a slot that he only gets one of per day, while Nine-Sword munchkin gets all his slots back between battles--or even in the middle of a battle. For the warblade, it's almost literally a snap of the fingers. So, another overwhelming benefit that blows away the notion of fairness.

Sweet Christmas, so broken. Disciplines pack the sheer power of an arcanist spell with the omnipresent utility of a feat.

In practical terms, though, the Warblade won't be fighting infinite encounters per day. And in general he can only use each maneuver once per encounter. So really, if we take the general rule that there will be 4 encounters per session and that the day ends when the session ends (since the casters and such will have to rest), then the Warblade will use the +100 dmg martial strike about 4 times per day. Practically, that's what happens. But yes, theoretically, the Warblade can do this an infinite number of times per day whereas the Wizard can only cast his maximized chain lightning (9th level slot) +quickened empowered scorching ray (8th level slot) 4 times per day for an avg damage of 153 (no non-Core uber cheese spells used in my hurried example or I bet I could get some more ridiculous caster dmg output for a 20th level caster).

EDIT: Oops. Forgot about the Warblade's being able to refresh a spent maneuver every round with the swift thing+attack. Meaning he could do the +100 dmg move every other round. Bit egregious perhaps, but then, I still am not convinced this is out of line with how much power an optimized wizard could wield in a single encounter and over the course of a typical session.

It's already been generally agreed upon by many that casters are ridiculously powerful at level 15+. Why is it considered overpowered if a melee character starts approaching that power at those levels? Is it that this seems to infringe too much on the burst dmg of high level casters? Or does the overpowered argument stem from comparisons to straight melee classes like the Fighter or Barbarian? I'm genuinely curious. I can certainly see the case there, as the book makes the traditional melee classes feel very tame in comparison. But then again, hasn't that always been a major complaint by many about melee classes? That they are so outshined by casters at the high levels? I think Tome of Battle is a good attempt by WotC to rectify that.

Now the player that likes melee combat but feels underpowered when he sees the Wizard cast a Power Word Kill or Meteor Swarm has an option that makes him feel just as strong, but yet still retains the melee flavor. I see nothing wrong with that.

I feel that way, even despite some gross overpowering in the warblade and other aspects of the Tome of Battle book. Those are easily rectified though and don't taint the overall enjoyment I have with the book.

Also, this is just straight damage comparisons, and it has been pointed out here at Enworld and elsewhere that the real power of spells lies in flexibilty, utility, buffs, and save or die effects. Overall, Tome of Battle and the Martial Adept classes infringe on none of that. So again, my guess is that the overpowering comparison is against the poor, maligned fighter (and to a lesser extent the other ftr BAB classes). In that respect, I can agree there. I hate that the fighter got slightly buffed by PHB II and then Tome of Battle all of a sudden outshines him. Poor fighter...

My issues are really with the Warblade. I'd lower his hit die to d10 and not allow them to recover all readied maneuvers with a swift action. I would allow them to do so, but not make it so easy.

 

[Xyvs]

Forgot to mention something

I will say that I play in different campaigns and have over the course of many years (decades - egads, I am old). Tome of Battle will be balanced for some campaigns but unbalanced in others.

It fits in a high magic type of campaign where the fantasy is spelled with a capital F. In low magic or more realistic campaigns, though, it just won't work. In my Dragonlance campaign, for example, I would not allow the Tome of Battle stuff because it is so out of character for the campaign and IS overpowered in such an environment.

But in my homebrew, which is more high fantasy and where ogre magi walk the streets of cosmopolitan cities beside wu jen and paladins, it fits right in, especially as the challenges I threw at my PCs were much higher CR and more fantastical than what I ran in Dragonlance (past tense since I no longer DM with my crazy work schedule).

So DMs of course should exercise caution with the book. It certainly doesnt fit in every campaign by any stretch of the imagination. But it is definitely a very evocative book with lots of cool style and high fantasy flavor that could fit in some campaigns.

 

[Dragonblade]

I have the book and find it PERFECTLY balanced. In fact, there has been some discussion in my group that Sword Sage only getting 1 maneuver back per full round action is underpowered. We have discussed the Sword Sage getting all maneuvers back as a Full Round action.

Some of you have said that you think its unbalanced for a high level Warblade to be able to do 100 points of damage with a 9th level maneuver only available to 17th level characters. An ability that can be done once per encounter unless time is taken to recover the maneuver. At best it can be done once every other round.

How is that more overpowered than a mage who can have all sorts of spells active before a battle even starts? How is that comparable to a 17th level sorcerer who can drop 16 MAXIMIZED fireballs one right after another? Or a 17th level sorcerer casting Disjunction? "Sorry party of adventurers, all of your magic items and buffs are now GONE!"

Not to mention versatility. An arcane caster of comparable level can Fly, Teleport, Shapechange, blast armies apart, turn invisible, turn incorporeal, create impenetrable walls of force, etc.

But no, a warrior, who has to actually get in close to his opponents and potentially get worked by multiple baddies, or simply get his ass torn apart by a powerful monster, gets a comparable attack and suddenly everything is broken.

Heck even a 20th level Rogue with the right feat can basically do 10d6 Sneak Attack damage EVERY freaking round. A 20th level Fighter previously couldn't do that even with all their feats. How is it balanced that at 20th level a Fighter isn't even the biggest melee damage dealer?

Heck with one feat (Arcane Strike) and one spell (Tenser's Transformation), a sorcerer or wizard character can even perform in melee combat MORE capably than a comparable Fighter PC! And thats without even mentioning other buffs they could have cast prior to combat even starting like Stoneskin.

The fact is that warriors were severely UNDERPOWERED before Tome of Battle. This book goes a long way in restoring balance that should have been there from the beginning.

 

[brehobit]

I have the book and find it PERFECTLY balanced. In fact, there has been some discussion in my group that Sword Sage only getting 1 maneuver back per full round action is underpowered. We have discussed the Sword Sage getting all maneuvers back as a Full Round action.

Some of you have said that you think its unbalanced for a high level Warblade to be able to do 100 points of damage with a 9th level maneuver only available to 17th level characters. An ability that can be done once per encounter unless time is taken to recover the maneuver. At best it can be done once every other round.

At 20th level I don't have a strong opinion. I don't play those levels _and_ I agree that warriors-types appear quite weak at those levels. However, at lower levels (1-5 say) warriors are, IME, the most powerful set of characters. Clerics come close. And above I showed a hastily built level 5 swordsage which is noticeably more powerful than anything warrior type (or anything else) at 5th level.

With a 32-point buy you could have
S14 I10 W16 D14 C14 Ch10. Let's go halfing so S is 12 and D is 16. Level 5 swordsage.
His standard (no stances) against medium and larger creatures is:

AC =10+4 (chain shirt) +1 (size) +3 (dex) +3(wis) = 21.
Attack=3(BAB) + 1 (STR) +1 (size) +2 (stance) +1 (WF)= +8
Damage=dX (weapon) +1 (STR) +4 (stance) +3 (Wis) or weapon +8

With magic (say +2 Wis +1 chain shirt, +1 weapon) this goes to 23 AC and +9 attack dX+10 damage.

A halforc barb in full plate with a two handed sword, 20 STR and 12 dex has:

AC 10+8 (full plate) +1 (Dex) = 19
attack +5 (BAB) +5 (STR) =+10
Damage = +7 (STR)

With magic probably AC 21 attack +11 Damage +8.

It is at the _least_ a close call which is better. The 1/2 orc will have more hps. The halfling has a much smaller armor penalty.

Now if the half-orc rages he gets +2 attack, +3 damage, -2 AC and some hitpoints. Baring feats, he can only do this once per day.

The halfling can, once per encounter, do 6d6 fire damage (reflex save DC 16 for half) to a target. That same 6d6 will hit everyohe other than the swordsage within 10' of the target. That probably averages at +16 damage against most opponents PLUS the area of effect attack.

Plus the halfing has other maneuvers, stances and is way ahead on initiative (I think +4 advantage). Not to mention saves.

It ain't really close. And the sword sage appears to be the weakest of the lot. If the halfing is fighting a small or smaller opponent, he needs to change stances. But still...

Utterly unbalanced? No. Unbalanced? Oh yeah.

Mark