My Gut Reaction to Book of Nine Swords

[SteveC]

Dependence on 4 stats? Oh, you mean they reap all those benefits from having an Int bonus. That's not a dependency, it's a perk. A stupid warblade still mops up. Strikes me as complaining about desert again.

I have to ask if you're actually serious with this point, or are merely arguing to, well, argue. 'Cause if you are, I'd like to ask for some help with this monk class that has the perk of benefitting from five stats!

Seriously, if you're using a point-buy, having five class features based on an abilty score that most similar characters will leave at 10 (unless they're going to be combat expertise based) is not a dessert. It's an attempt to make the class more in line with other fighting classes. A warblade that wants to use those abilities will have one and possibly more than one ability that is lower than a comparable fighter or barbarian. It's just that simple.

--Steve

 

[gribble]

It's an attempt to make the class more in line with other fighting classes. A warblade that wants to use those abilities will have one and possibly more than one ability that is lower than a comparable fighter or barbarian. It's just that simple.

I agree with Steve here - the dependence on Int is one of things that I think is intended to balance out the warblade a bit. Hmmmm... on reflection, perhaps thats why they gave it d12 HD, under the assumption that Con would be the next natural dump stat (given that they'll want Dex because they're only proficient with medium armour, and they'll obviously want a high Str being a primary melee type). Not that I like the d12 HD at all, but at least that might provide some justification for it...

 

[Psion]

Now style out of the way, I don't like the book mechanically either. Fighting has traditionally been the role of the fighter and nifty effects have traditionally been the role of the wizard, cleric, druid, or [insert spellcaster here]. The Book of Nine Swords introduces nine new disciplines which work very much like schools of magic, are even grouped into levels from 1 to 9 like spells, and have abilities (such as the ability to inflict 4d6 fire damage on an opponent who hits you as an immediate action or the ability to take two full round actions in one round once per encounter) that are well on par with spells of their level, even if they are martially oriented.

Cool.

I remember an early d20 product like this, when most authors really didn't have a good grasp on balance. I remember thinking at the time that it was an interesting way to handle things if someone could do it right.

I didn't expect wizards to be the one to pick up that ball and run with it. But hey, more power to them! I hope it works as well as it sounds.

 

[Justin Bacon]

Now I like movies like Kill Bill and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, but when it comes to gaming, I don't want my PCs flying around like ninjas and dancing in a whirl of blades that undresses their foe. Such things can be cinematic and entertaining when on screen but for my money, they add nothing to a roleplaying game. I have nothing specifically against Asian culture, but if a roleplaying game is going to be set in the Far East or a world with oriental style, I prefer the game to focus on the elements that make that kind of world unique, not the absurd type of fighting we see in the movies that any reasonable person knows is not very realistic.

Man, I totally agree. I like movies like Lord of the Rings, but when it comes to gaming, I don't want my PCs casting spells and wielding magical swords. Such things can be cinematic and entertaining when on screen, but for my money, they add nothing to a roleplaying game. I have nothing specifically against Western culture, but if a roleplaying game is going to be set in Western Europe or a world with European trappings, I prefer the game to focus on the elements that make that kind of world unique, not the absurd type of spell-slinging we see in the movies that any reasonable person would know is not very realistic!

...

Obviously I'm being facetious. I just always find it amusing when people claim that, if they're wiggling their fingers and chanting incantations, it's perfectly believable. But if they're dancing with swords? Ridiculous and unacceptable.

Now, I can understand it being an issue of taste (nobody has to like everything). And I can understand it being a matter of style (I wouldn't want Aragorn breaking out wuxia-style, either). But it bugs me when people playing Fantasy Style #1 get bent out of shape because Fantasy Style #2 is "not very realistic".

 

[SteveC]

I agree with Steve here - the dependence on Int is one of things that I think is intended to balance out the warblade a bit. Hmmmm... on reflection, perhaps thats why they gave it d12 HD, under the assumption that Con would be the next natural dump stat (given that they'll want Dex because they're only proficient with medium armour, and they'll obviously want a high Str being a primary melee type). Not that I like the d12 HD at all, but at least that might provide some justification for it...

I will add just one thing on the D12 side: I use average HP in the campaign I'm running, so the difference between a D10 and a D12 is one point per level. That's 21 points over a 20 level career (one more because of first level with 12 HP). It's really not that big of a deal. I think when 3.0 first came out, D12 as a HP option was considered a lot more important by the designers than it is today. It has a lot of emotional appeal, but isn't that much better than the fighter's D10. See the comments on the D12 in the Order of the Stick for more info...

My only real problem with the warblade is on how easy it is for them to refresh maneuvers. I guess I'd have to see it in play to really see how big a deal that is.

--Steve

 

[Felon]

I have to ask if you're actually serious with this point, or are merely arguing to, well, argue. 'Cause if you are, I'd like to ask for some help with this monk class that has the perk of benefitting from five stats!

Examining a monk, it's easy to see that its attack and damage are as dependent on Strength as much as any melee combatant, perhaps moreso due to the medium BAB. The class is not proficient with any armor, so it really depends on a combination of Dexterity and Wisdom for armor class. The class has 1d8 hit dice, so a Con bonus is a helpful thing to have.

These can be genuinely considered dependencies. The class will suffer appreciably without a bonus to any of those four ability scores. Spellcasters provide an even more extreme example of ability score dependency, since their maximum attainable spell level is determined by an ability score, not to mention saving throw DC's and bonus spells. A wizard with a 10 Int is clearly a non-starter.

This leads some folks to consider it axiomatic that any class feature that's based on an ability score should be considered a dependency. However, looking over the warblade, the class is clearly not dependent on its Intelligence bonus for anything fundamental. Even given a 10 Intelligence score, its attack, damage, and hit points would all still be outstanding. A warblade's armor class could be considered mediocre, but none of its Int abilities improve that anyway. It would have one good saving throw, which is common to many classes.

In short, the Int bonuses are perks, not dependencies. Nice to have, but not essential. Give it a medium BAB and d8 hit dice like the monk, and then we can talk about dependencies.

 

[Felon]

I agree with Steve here - the dependence on Int is one of things that I think is intended to balance out the warblade a bit.

Giving the warblade a deficiency that requires a high ability score to compensate constitutes a dependency. A monk's medium BAB, mediocre hit die, and lack of armor proficiency all create ability dependencies. A swashbuckler's emphasis on low-damage finess weapons creates a dependency.

Just saying "here are some conditional bonuses to saves or attacks or damage" doesn't create a dependency. "Dependency" denotes a need, not a desire.

 

[SteveC]

Examining a monk, it's easy to see that its attack and damage are as dependent on Strength as much as any melee combatant, perhaps moreso due to the medium BAB. The class is not proficient with any armor, so it really depends on a combination of Dexterity and Wisdom for armor class. The class has 1d8 hit dice, so a Con bonus is a helpful thing to have.

That's a nice summary of the monk class, and why it needs to have high values in pretty much every stat except charisma. Now if you're trying to tell me that the Warblade, with 5 out of the classes 13 abilities being tied to intelligence doesn't make it dependant on having a bonus in that score, I'm going to tell you you're nuts. Is someone actually going to create a character and not use any of those abilities? Well yes, they're probably are. People make choices based on their character concept rather than character optimization all the time. Still, when you're designing a class, you take it as a given that people will design their characters to make use of its abilities. I bet that the Warblade builds over on the optimization boards will not have a low int score. That's hardly the be-all-end-all of character creation, but it is where you look when you design efficient characters.

This leads some folks to consider it axiomatic that any class feature that's based on an ability score should be considered a dependency. However, looking over the warblade, the class is clearly not dependent on its Intelligence bonus for anything fundamental. Even given a 10 Intelligence score, its attack, damage, and hit points would all still be outstanding. A warblade's armor class could be considered mediocre, but none of its Int abilities improve that anyway. It would have one good saving throw, which is common to many classes.

In short, the Int bonuses are perks, not dependencies. Nice to have, but not essential. Give it a medium BAB and d8 hit dice like the monk, and then we can talk about dependencies.

Wow, I guess you are going to make that argument. I guess I'd say that you're going to see about as many Warblades with Int 10 as swashbucklers with Int 10. After all, the swashbuckler has a much smaller set of abilities based on a high int.

Different strokes and all that, but I guess I find:

A bonus to reflex saves where the ref save is poor to begin with
A bonus to confirm crits
A bonus to damage versus flat footed or flanked opponents
A bonus versus bull rush, feints, trips, disarms, overruns and sunders
A bonus to attacks and damage on AoO's

...to be something I most likely would build into my character. It's over a third of the class abilities, after all. Are any of these essential? No, but I have also seen monk builds with low wis scores as well. I must admit to never having seen a swashbuckler with a low int, but then there must be one out there somewhere...

I guess after all that, it seems that this is a major case of "your mileage may vary."

--Steve

 

[BryonD]

Different strokes and all that, but I guess I find:

A bonus to reflex saves where the ref save is poor to begin with
A bonus to confirm crits
A bonus to damage versus flat footed or flanked opponents
A bonus versus bull rush, feints, trips, disarms, overruns and sunders
A bonus to attacks and damage on AoO's

...to be something I most likely would build into my character. It's over a third of the class abilities, after all. Are any of these essential? No, but I have also seen monk builds with low wis scores as well. I must admit to never having seen a swashbuckler with a low int, but then there must be one out there somewhere...

I guess after all that, it seems that this is a major case of "your mileage may vary."

--Steve

I think you are missing the point.
These are certainly very valid points to consider in the build of a warblade.
However, every single one you listed is a potential perk over and above a fighter.
So, if you ignored every single one, you would not lose a single step on the fighter.

Or, put simply, an INT 10 Warblade blows the doors off a fighter without these perks.
A player can then max/min from there and give the fighter a small advantage on some other ability in exchange for gaining even better advantages.
It isn't a case, for me, of YMMV in the value of these items. It is that these items are major mileage optional adders on an already overly potent base.

 

[shilsen]

Man, I totally agree. I like movies like Lord of the Rings, but when it comes to gaming, I don't want my PCs casting spells and wielding magical swords. Such things can be cinematic and entertaining when on screen, but for my money, they add nothing to a roleplaying game. I have nothing specifically against Western culture, but if a roleplaying game is going to be set in Western Europe or a world with European trappings, I prefer the game to focus on the elements that make that kind of world unique, not the absurd type of spell-slinging we see in the movies that any reasonable person would know is not very realistic!

...

Obviously I'm being facetious. I just always find it amusing when people claim that, if they're wiggling their fingers and chanting incantations, it's perfectly believable. But if they're dancing with swords? Ridiculous and unacceptable.

Now, I can understand it being an issue of taste (nobody has to like everything). And I can understand it being a matter of style (I wouldn't want Aragorn breaking out wuxia-style, either). But it bugs me when people playing Fantasy Style #1 get bent out of shape because Fantasy Style #2 is "not very realistic".

Q.F.T.