Warblade and Swordsage: Overpowered?

[Bivotar]

regarding Slaved's post...I seem to recall that the Warblade's not proficient with the comp longbow or ranged martial weapons in general. My book's at home though so I can't look up whether I'm on crack or not though.

It is true. The Warblade (and I think the Swordsage too) only have martial proficiency in melee weapons. That of course did not stop WOTC from putting the example characters in the book with longbows and such. The warblade could use a crossbow though.

 

[Bivotar]

Oh and my character can read so he'll taunt your character by writing funny notes about him and passing it around to all the other fighter types!

LOL. And don't they say that the pen is mightier than the sword.

 

[KuKu]

It is true. The Warblade (and I think the Swordsage too) only have martial proficiency in melee weapons. That of course did not stop WOTC from putting the example characters in the book with longbows and such. The warblade could use a crossbow though.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2
This says simple and martial melee weapons and thrown weapons. I think that would mean no crossbows and I think that a warblade would have to use something like throwing axxes or pepper sprays.

 

[Sithobi1]

That depends whether you read it as (simple and martial) melee weapons or simple and (martial melee) weapons. I'm not sure which one I prefer.

 

[Bivotar]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2
This says simple and martial melee weapons and thrown weapons. I think that would mean no crossbows and I think that a warblade would have to use something like throwing axxes or pepper sprays.

Hmmm. I took it as all simple weapons and only martial melee weapons. But it could be the other way too. I guess it all depends on how one reads it. To me if it meant only melee weapons for both simple and martial weapons then it would have read:

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: You are proficient with simple melee and martial melee weapons (including those that can be used as thrown weapons), light and medium armor, and all shields except tower shields.

(Bolded text added by me)

 

[sithramir]

Will do, and apparently the hide tags do not work here

Barbarian Barblader
Male dwarf Barbarian 5
CN Medium Humanoid
Init +2; Senses Listen +, Spot +; darkvision 60 ft.
Languages Common, Dwarven
AC 20, touch 12, flat-footed 19, +4 AC against giants, uncanny dodge (Dex +2, +1 Breastplate armor +6, +1 Deflection, +1 natural)
Hp 58 (5 HD)
Resist stability
Saves Fort +9(+11 against poison), Ref +4, Will +2; +2 on saves against spells and spell-like effects
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 greatsword +10 (2d6+5/x3)
Atk Options +1 on attacks against orcs and goblinoids, battle ardor
Base Atk +5, Grp +8
Combat Gear potion of cure light wounds
Special: Fast movement (factored in above), illiteracy, rage 2/day, uncanndy dodge, trap sense +1, improved uncanny dodge
Abilities Str 16, Dex 14, Con 18, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 6
SQ stonecutting
Feats Weapon Focus (great sword), power attack
Skills Tumble (cross classed) 4 ranks = +6, listen 8 ranks = +8, Survival 8 ranks = +8, etc
Possesions Breastplate +1, greatsword +1, Ring of Protection +1, cloak of protection +1, amulet of natural armor +1


So now the barbarian has 3 more AC than the warblade, 1 while raging. The warblade could use a shield, nonmagical right now, but would lose damage.

Plus earlier I apparently forgot to add in crits! Something is wrong with me. The damage numbers go to, over a 2 round period, 42 for the barbarian and 44 for the warblade. Barely distinguishable against critable foes. If the warblade uses a shield his damage is barely effected, which is great news for people who want to use sword and board techniques, and it drops to 43. Still basically the same.

The warblade is better at the occasional reflex save, much better in fact, but it slows down his damage greatly. Basically he is trading 22 or 23 damage, depending on shield use, for a higher reflex save against a single reflex based attack. Right now though the barbarian is likely to have a better will save. Not by a lot, but better while raging. Hold person still ends either of their lives, but the barbarian has a better time with it most of the time.

The barbarian moves faster currently. It is possible for the warblade to match this at level 10, but that is a long way off from here.

There were some other comments that could be responded to if higher level characters were made to compare. Do not jump the gun sithramir! We are doing fine so far, we just have to go slowly.


Oh, and just because here is the barbarian who can pick up any weapon and immediately use it just as well
Barbarian Barblader
Male dwarf Barbarian 5
CN Medium Humanoid
Init +3; Senses Listen +, Spot +; darkvision 60 ft.
Languages Common, Dwarven
AC 21, touch 13, flat-footed 19, +4 AC against giants, uncanny dodge (Dex +3, +1 Breastplate armor +6, +1 Deflection, +1 natural)
Hp 53 (5 HD)
Resist stability
Saves Fort +9(+11 against poison), Ref +5, Will +2; +2 on saves against spells and spell-like effects
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 greatsword +9 (2d6+5/x3)
Atk Options +1 on attacks against orcs and goblinoids, battle ardor
Base Atk +5, Grp +8
Combat Gear potion of cure light wounds
Special: Fast movement (factored in above), illiteracy, rage 4/day, uncanndy dodge, trap sense +1, improved uncanny dodge
Abilities Str 16, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 6
SQ stonecutting
Feats extra rage, reckless rage
Skills Tumble (cross classed) 4 ranks = +7, listen 8 ranks = +8, Survival 8 ranks = +8, etc
Possesions Breastplate +1, greatsword +1, Ring of Protection +1, cloak of protection +1, amulet of natural armor +1

Now he can rage every encounter of the day basically, although this still has some drawbacks which makes the warblades version of the abilities better.

But while raging his attack spread is +12 to hit and 2d6+10 for a two round average of 37. The warblade is doing 44, assuming no shield, but with 2 points less on the attack bonus. Depending on the AC of the opponent this could mean that the average damage is higher for either of them.

Edited.....
Oh yeah, the warblade and the barbarian should also have appropriate ranged weapons. I think that would mean composite longbows for each with +3 str on them. The barbarian might want a stronger one, because raging and ranged combat is funny, but I am not sure. In these examples the barbarian is better at ranged, but only by a +1 or +2 bonus respectively. The warblade could spend an hour moving his weapon focus, which is a great ability, but then he will be an extra point of attack bonus behind in melee.

You're right. The barbarian at level 5 will have better speed. However, at level 6 I get a new stance that gives me +10 movement, and +2 to AC whenever I move 10'. That's what's too powerful about the warblade.

He was barely short for enough for a +1 Nat AC item. However, he only loses 1 point of damage (on his second attack) to use a shield. And he did have over 1000 gp's left so he can afford a +1 Shield. Also I can give him a breastplate the same as you since I was only getting a +5. SO basically with a few changes to my character my AC is 3 greater. At level 6 it will go up by 2 with my stance and for a very cheap cost up one more for a +1 Nat AC item. Since you left your Int at 10 I'll make mine 10 and boost my Dex up by 2 to match. SO my AC is 4 higher than previous.

My character get's plus's to confirm critical's also!

So now my character has an AC of 21. You are now less than his AC (more so raging to get the added damage). If we want to go statistical I'll spend an hour and switch to a weapon with a better crit range if to crit range is factored in. But you're already unable to match his damage output currently plus his other benefits so I won't bother.

And he doesn't always trade any damage for a reflex save. He uses his maneuver as a standard action and can use a reflex or will save as an immediate. He just recharges them all when he recharges his maneuver. If he had to wait an extra round (if he had to do it before the start of the second round when he'd recharge) he can still use mountain hammer to increase his damage +2d6 for that round. SO yes there is a point where his damage is lessened but at the price of guaranteeing his will or reflex save. Wouldn't you take that?

You said that the barbarian has a better time against hold person but I don't understand why. The first attack spell against a warblade is a guaranteed success at this level versus a +2 save or slightly higher while raging. Yes, if he get's hit with two in a round or so he is in more trouble but the barbarian suffers worse since he has to make two saves with his worst save anyways. Two spells won't likely happen at this level in the same round but the warblade is still better of knowing he's going to succeed on his first.

You're character can't pick up any weapon and use it immediately AND do similar damage. In fact, any other weapon and you lose your 2d6 and crit range as well as potentialyl a chance to two-hand attack depending on the weapon. This does not affect my warblade (especially if he's using a shield and a one-hand weapon). If you didn't want me to use a shield I could also use a greatsword and increase my average dmg a few more points as well.

It's odd that I can nearly copy all the barbarians abilities except rage with a warblade though not at this level. I was concerned with fighters but this makes me more concerned that barbarians are losing a lot compared to warblades as well.

Yes, you're reckless raging barbarian is getting "closer" to the warblade's damage output but not able to yet surpass it nor the other benefits the warblade is gaining. And at this level with that high of an output he's going to be slaying things easy. That 5 or more so damage he can do may be what ends a creatures life. Another factor that's not really considered statistically is that while his two round average is only slightly higher than you're characters he's doing potentially more of it in the first round. If we found a wizard will he live through 1d20+22? Probably not. Will he live past 2d6+10? Likely. THis is something that needs to be remembered in the fact that many creatures don't live to see the second round with warblades. Heck, a high roll and most other level 5 PC's will fall.

Can you please explain your averages to me? 2d6+10 X 2 = 32? Or are we saying a d6 averages at 3.5 for a total of 7 +10 X2 = 34. Warblade is 1d20+22+1d10+5 = 42? or is a d20 avg an 11 and a d10 a 5.5 = 43.5? Sorry i'm at work but it seems the differential is higher. I'd probably just assume i'm one-handed with a shield so my AC is 1 higher than yours and my average damage goes down by 1 point. That way the only benefit is you're +2 attack bonus while in rage.

Basically i'd say let's keep things on even ground. If we want a higher AC I can give him a similar or higher AC. The fact still remains that his damage output is greater (even if close) plus several other abilities

 

[sithramir]

Hmmm. I took it as all simple weapons and only martial melee weapons. But it could be the other way too. I guess it all depends on how one reads it. To me if it meant only melee weapons for both simple and martial weapons then it would have read:

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: You are proficient with simple melee and martial melee weapons (including those that can be used as thrown weapons), light and medium armor, and all shields except tower shields.

(Bolded text added by me)

You're bold is how I would read it as well. Simple and Martial both are referring melee weapons. If they had written "with simple weapons and martial melee weapons" then I would say he gets all simple. The bold isn't needed. Too bad WotC doesn't have an english major to edit for them

 

[Bivotar]

You're bold is how I would read it as well. Simple and Martial both are referring melee weapons. If they had written "with simple weapons and martial melee weapons" then I would say he gets all simple. The bold isn't needed. Too bad WotC doesn't have an english major to edit for them

Actually looking closer at it I think you may be right. Looking at the fighter it says:

A fighter is proficient with all simple and martial weapons...

And a warblade says the following:

You are proficient with simple and martial melee weapons (including those that can be used as thrown weapons)...

So if the warblade were truly proficient in all simple weapons and only martial melee weapons then it would have read something like what you wrote or it would have added the "all" before simple.

So I just checked the ToB again and it looks like the weapon prof break down like this for each of the martial adepts:

Crusader: same as a fighter
Swordsage: all simple weapons, martial melee weapons (including thrown weapons)
Warblade: simple melee weapons, martial melee weapons (including thrown weapons)

Does that seem correct?

 

[Nail]

@ Bivotar: Agreed.

No missile weapons that are not also melee weapons for WB.

 

[Nail]

...I'm not so sure about Swordsage. The wording is different from WB...but only barely. Given editting problems in the book, I wouldn't be surprised if the difference between swordsage and WB is an error.