D&D 3E/3.5 Does Magic of Incarnum and 3e's Tome of Magic and Tome of Battle have a place in 5e?

[TiwazTyrsfist]

I know I'm in the minority here, but I personally really liked Icarnum. I thought it was an interesting system, and it heavily subverted 3.X's magic item economy.
I personally felt it worked well in 3.X

However, that said, I don't think it works in 5e's low item setting. 3.X was built on the concept that you would fill all your slots as quickly as possible, and constantly upgrade them. Incarnum did that. 5e's flavor of (at least in Adv League) by level 10 you may have 4 magic items and 2 of them will be useful, doesn't allow for Incarnum to do anything.


As for Tome of Magic, basically it was 3 takes on "How do we balance moving away from Vancian Fire and Forget Slot Magic without having to completely rewrite the entire game engine?" True naming was an interesting idea that didn't work.
Meanwhile, the fundamental parts of Pact Magic (Gain these buffs as a supernatural ability) and Shadow Magic (Cast spells as a Supernatural Ability no slots) are folded into the Warlock Class.
I could easily see the FLUFF of pact magic being developed into one or more warlock subclasses, both patron and pact type.


Book of Nine Swords was, likewise, an attempt to deal with the fact that, in 3.X, at higher levels weapon based characters were weak compared to casters. The abilities gave fighters advancing power levels to allow them to keep up with Wizards, Clerics, and Druids.
5e has done a lot to fix this power imbalance IMO.
As other's have said, the more mundane maneuvers have been incorporated into the Battle Master subclass, but I would be more than happy to see more maneuvers added in a book like Xanathar.
Additionally, I see no reason that the more mystical maneuvers couldn't be adapted into another subclass. Something in between Battle Master and Eldritch Knight that has access to the Elemental Damage heavy maneuvers.
Also, I really loved the system with the Divine inspired class. I forget the name, but basically my take away was that since your combat skills were divinely inspired, you didn't really have full control of what you could do. It was the one where IIRC you basically wrote your powers on some cards, Shuffled them, and then drew a few each round, and those were the powers you had access to that round. I felt it made combat more interesting because you couldn't just spam the same thing or over plan for the next five rounds.


TLDR:
I loved Incarnum, but 5e is Magic Item Light, so Incarnum doesn't work.
The Two decent parts of Tome of Magic are already rolled into Warlock, though more fluff could be brought in as a new Pact/Patron.
9 Swords is Partially rolled into Battle Master, but I feel the flashier paths could fuel another Subclass with a different feel and be good.

 

[gyor]

Those 3 books represented attempts to experiment in 3e's lifetime.

I think everyone felt that Incarnum was too far out there in weirdness, most of Tome of Magic felt poorly implemented as remember how the True Namer was an example of why there should never be a skill-roll based power system. Though the Binder was well received. Tome of Battle was in many ways the precursor to 4e's power system, but I liked the system of martial magic and special techniques, and even the idea of the various schools of fighting styles like Desert Wind and White Raven.

But in 5e could any of the ideas from these books have more of a place? There isn't a Vestige Pact Warlock yet, which was 4e's attempt at the Binder, but I feel that could happen. Shadow magic was most like the existing system of magic, and there is a Shadow Sorcerer, but I feel there could be a wizard subclass that's somewhere between a Necromancer and Illusionist (or at least a Necromancer-like Wizard that's less about the undead), much like how the War Mage is between the Abjurer and Evoker.

Could there be Ways of the Desert Wind or Setting Sun or Diamond Mind Monks? Or ideas to have a more story-involved Battlemaster Fighter, since the Battlemaster seemed to be just a Fighter subclass for a rules system.

I don't know if anything can be done for Incarnum in 5e since it was such an experimental concept.

The 4e Nethermancer was kind of a cross between an illusionist and a necromancer with a shadowy focus in feel for Wizards.

Still I think the Shadow Magic Sorceror is a fine successor to be the Shadowcaster and odd the Shade race.

 

[gyor]

I know I'm in the minority here, but I personally really liked Icarnum. I thought it was an interesting system, and it heavily subverted 3.X's magic item economy.
I personally felt it worked well in 3.X

However, that said, I don't think it works in 5e's low item setting. 3.X was built on the concept that you would fill all your slots as quickly as possible, and constantly upgrade them. Incarnum did that. 5e's flavor of (at least in Adv League) by level 10 you may have 4 magic items and 2 of them will be useful, doesn't allow for Incarnum to do anything.


As for Tome of Magic, basically it was 3 takes on "How do we balance moving away from Vancian Fire and Forget Slot Magic without having to completely rewrite the entire game engine?" True naming was an interesting idea that didn't work.
Meanwhile, the fundamental parts of Pact Magic (Gain these buffs as a supernatural ability) and Shadow Magic (Cast spells as a Supernatural Ability no slots) are folded into the Warlock Class.
I could easily see the FLUFF of pact magic being developed into one or more warlock subclasses, both patron and pact type.


Book of Nine Swords was, likewise, an attempt to deal with the fact that, in 3.X, at higher levels weapon based characters were weak compared to casters. The abilities gave fighters advancing power levels to allow them to keep up with Wizards, Clerics, and Druids.
5e has done a lot to fix this power imbalance IMO.
As other's have said, the more mundane maneuvers have been incorporated into the Battle Master subclass, but I would be more than happy to see more maneuvers added in a book like Xanathar.
Additionally, I see no reason that the more mystical maneuvers couldn't be adapted into another subclass. Something in between Battle Master and Eldritch Knight that has access to the Elemental Damage heavy maneuvers.
Also, I really loved the system with the Divine inspired class. I forget the name, but basically my take away was that since your combat skills were divinely inspired, you didn't really have full control of what you could do. It was the one where IIRC you basically wrote your powers on some cards, Shuffled them, and then drew a few each round, and those were the powers you had access to that round. I felt it made combat more interesting because you couldn't just spam the same thing or over plan for the next five rounds.


TLDR:
I loved Incarnum, but 5e is Magic Item Light, so Incarnum doesn't work.
The Two decent parts of Tome of Magic are already rolled into Warlock, though more fluff could be brought in as a new Pact/Patron.
9 Swords is Partially rolled into Battle Master, but I feel the flashier paths could fuel another Subclass with a different feel and be good.

I'd make binding magic feat based instead of subclass based, I think it would fit the original easy, but weird & creepy unnatural magic feel better.

 

[Staffan]

Meanwhile, the fundamental parts of Pact Magic (Gain these buffs as a supernatural ability) and Shadow Magic (Cast spells as a Supernatural Ability no slots) are folded into the Warlock Class.

IMO, the fundamental mechanical part of the Binder was that they essentially got to respec their character on a daily basis, similar to a prepared caster but with supernatural abilities instead of spells. The Warlock with their invocations have taken some of the binder's concept (supernatural abilities based on otherworldly beings), but not their versatility (once an invocation is chosen, you're stuck with it forever).

 

[Satyrn]

IMO, the fundamental mechanical part of the Binder was that they essentially got to respec their character on a daily basis, similar to a prepared caster but with supernatural abilities instead of spells.

Aye. That was also how I saw the Incarnum classes. And it was that part of it that I felt was boring - too many choices, too many different things a character could be, could focus on, and it could change with every adventuring day.

I thought the binder reduced the choices to a more meaningful, less fiddly number.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I'm seeing (at least) two conversations in this thread being conflated into one. Let's clarify what we're talking about.

Are we talking about the flavor of the 3e classes finding their way into 5e? Is the discussion about whether (to use incarnum as an example) dudes who shape soulpower into glowing blue weapons and armor have a place in this edition?

Or are we talking about the mechanics of the 3e classes finding their way into 5e? Is the discussion about whether dudes whose power comes from selecting and modifying an array of buff effects without a daily resource limit have a place in this edition?

Because if we're having the first conversation, then we can talk about whether incarnum is too weird or not and whether a sorcerer or cleric or druid subclass might fit the bill. But if we're having the second one, then both of those topics are beside the point.

And personally, I think the second conversation is much more interesting and fruitful. Flavor is a matter of taste, and writing a subclass to match a particular flavor is, frankly, not very difficult. But effectively adapting a completely different magic system to 5e's rules and design philosophy? There's a challenge worthy of some thought.

 

[Satyrn]

I've been engaging in the second (well, my first post was) because I firmly believe that any flavor someone wants is legitimate just for being wanted. So, to me, of course incarnum is not too weird to be included.

I think I'd want to introduce it as a feat. I'd want it be something like Martial Adept or Magic Initiate, something that gives a splash of another class's power - but in this case the class would be non-existent. Like the feat lets you select 3 soulmelds and you can have 1 active at a time.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Aye. That was also how I saw the Incarnum classes. And it was that part of it that I felt was boring - too many choices, too many different things a character could be, could focus on, and it could change with every adventuring day.

There was another fundamental aspect of incarnum: the floating pool of essentia points that allowed a character to choose their strengths on a round-by-round basis. And in my personal experience playing incarnates and totemists, this was much more meaningful. I tended to have particular soulmeld loadouts that I strongly favored every day, and paid far more attention to where my essentia was. So what if the successor to incarnum focused on that aspect? Locked in a loadout like a sorcerer rather than giving you carte blanche like a cleric, and just asked you to decide what you're doing with what you have?

There's no sense in my being coy about it: I've been working on a 5e magic system that operates this way for a while now. And for those who don't like the flavor of incarnum, I've reimagined it as qi-powered tattoos. In keeping with 5e's "keep it simple" philosophy, I've pared away a lot of the fiddly bits. As mentioned, you acquire a permanent set of tattoos rather than re-preparing soulmelds every day. Chakra binds and essentia points have been merged into qi slots, one each of levels 1 through 5. Qi slots have nothing to do with magic item slots (which of course don't exist anymore anyway). They're called "slots" to be analogous to spell slots, but you don't spend them. Instead, you just assign a slot to one of your tattoos, and the tattoo is more powerful for as long as it's assigned. You can switch around slots as a bonus action. Easy, right?

 

[Satyrn]

That sounds like a good direction to go with it. Good luck!

 

[Satyrn]

Oh, I remembered where I saw a 5e binder.

Mage Hand Press. And it's free!