Warblade and Swordsage: Overpowered?

[Bivotar]

...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.

I would tend to agree about there possibly being an editing error but it may be correct. Not sure if it really unbalances anything for the swordsage to allow all simple weapons.

But it is odd about the warblade having such limited access to weapons. This is the first time I have ever seen such a slicing of the weapon proficiencies. Doesn't really bother me though.

 

[Slaved]

Wow.. that lack of ranged weapons for the warblade is rough. That means that the other character in question, barbarian in my last build, has a major advantage at range. He is doing d8+3 with a +8 attack bonus (can't afford masterwork with everything else I believe) at a long range vs. the warblades nothing at all, maybe throwing axes or something.

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.

You are going to spend a feat for that stance? If so we are definately going to have to make those 6th level builds and compare them.

And he did have over 1000 gp's left so he can afford a +1 Shield.

Only if you do not get the cloak of protection I believe. I was hoping that you would so that the saves would be about equal still before raging or the manuever.

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.

The immediate action steals your next rounds swift action. It takes a swift action to recover your manuevers. So in order to use your big move every other round you cannot use your reflex boost at all. This means that you are losing damage.

I think that the number of times you have to make a reflex save during your own turn is incredibly low so that is unlikely to be an issue.

You said that the barbarian has a better time against hold person but I don't understand why.

Well, while raging the barbarians will save is better than the warblades will save. If you go for the shield then the barbarians will save is always better than the warblades along with the rest of his saves being better as well. The warblade does not yet have the ability to trade out his will save so it is not fair trying to say that he can, you already tried that once and was called on it.

You're character can't pick up any weapon and use it immediately AND do similar damage.

Why not? For melee weapons the second build has exactly the same strength score for each and none of his bonuses are specific weapon dependent.

Compared with that the warblade is at a slight disadvantage because he has to rest for a night and then train for awhile to change over his weapon focus.

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.

At this point it is coming down to there not being feats or items specialized in one area while there are feats and items specialized in the other. There arent any feats to pick up for the barbarian that will help out directly. Oversized weapon gives more penalties than bonuses, exotic weapon doesn't have a good choice, etc. Whereas the warblade was able to focus 2 feats and 8 skill points and about half of his wealth on a single goal.

The two came out pretty even while the barbarian is raging, the barbarian is miles ahead in ranged, and the warblade comes out ahead in versitility and staying power, along with a better first blow in most circumstances. Oh, and the warblade can be ahead on AC if he tries, he actually makes a good sword and board character! That is amazing!

All in all, not bad. I think the biggest problem I see is that the +5 concentration item is too cheap, at least for this character. I don't know about it general, although I do know that some people complain casters have it too easy when it comes to concentration checks.

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?

The average is calculated for a single, linear die by taking the maximum result, adding it to the minimum result, and then dividing by 2. It works the same for all dice combinations with fair dice with equal chances for each number, but that is the slow way to do it.

So d6 averages to 3.5, d20 averages to 10.5 and d10 averages to 5.5. I might have made a mistake adding somewhere though, it happens.

2d6+10 x2 should be 34, d20+d10+22+5 should be 43, I will look over my numbers when I am not quite so tired but the ones in other posts look ok at a glance.

Basically i'd say let's keep things on even ground.

Then where is your cloak of resistance?

If you like the barbarian could beat up your character in a duel but I do not see how that would prove anything.


edited.....
I am really enjoying the comparisons. I just wish I knew the different books better to know if there are feats out there which actually help characters focus as much as the warblade with his concentration feats focuses. Being able to drop that sheer load of things onto one ability would make any ability strong! It reminds me of a warlock using a bunch of feats and items to boost up his blast to incredible touch attack damage several times a day.

edited again....

BTW, Slaved, thanks for these write-ups! I wish I had more time right now to look them over in detail.

Do you have a spreadsheet that can calculate average damage per roudn against a given AC? I do, as well as the average AC for comparably CR opponents in the core rules. It's helpful in this kind of comparison.

I am sorry that I missed this earlier nail.

I do not have a spreadsheet or anything, I have not really even compared to many AC's. I don't know if average AC's will help though, enemies are so very variable between campaigns. Does the spreadsheet that you have give you the average damage for many AC's at the same time? I was trying to keep the attack bonuses the same but converting to hit to damage looks to be a losing proposition sometimes. Having to spend a feat to do less average damage seems like a barbarian way to go but it does not look to be terribly bright.

 

[glass]

For clarity, here is the quote from the book (page 43):

"You can make a critical hit with a strike, and in a few cases, a critical hit grants you additional benefits. You do not multiply extra damage from a strike with a successful critical hit. You treat it just as you would extra damage from an ability, such as sneak attack."

Ah, that is interesting, I had missed that. The interesting thing is, it contradicts itself. The first sentance says never multiply it; the second sentance says treat it like other abilities which add damage: ie multiply if it is a flat number, don't if it is damage.

So, the +100 damage strike doesn't become +400 if you get a critical hit with a scythe.

Well, that depends if you go by the first sentance or the second.

However, since Insightful Strike isn't extra damage, but the base damage of the strike, I'd say that will multiply. Otherwise, they would have said that you can't get a critical with Insightful Strike.

Agreed.


glass.

 

[glass]

I'm not sure they do. Critical hits don't increase normal damage, they just apply it more than once.

So with a critical hit on insightful strike you get to not apply normal damage twice.

How does that follow?


glass.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Does everybody feel that the difference between a Javelin and a Mighty Composite Longbow is that great, in the hands of a non-build character?

I.E. if you took a stock 5th or 6th level Barbarian and gave him a MCL and ran him through regular D&D encounters, especially published adventure content found in WotC modules or Dungeon adventures or the Dungeon Adventure Paths.

Would he be considerably more powerful than the same character with a set of javelins?

I.E. is the Simple, thrown, 30' inc., 1d6+Str that much weaker, in the game, than Martial, projectile, 110' inc., 1d8+Str?

Note that, if your strength score increases for any reason (buffs, rage, items) the extra damage is strapped immediately to the javelin, as a thrown weapon, but not to the longbow and that if, for any reason, your Strength score is lowered you take no penalty on the javelin attack but do take a penalty for using a Mighty bow without the Strength score it was built for.

Additionally, range increment. Are ranges greater than 30'-60' common in D&D games? Do your games often involve foes forced to travel in the open across hundreds of feet of terrain without cover, total cover, or concealment to reach melee combat with your non-bow-specialized character? Without the arcane casters blowing them up for multiple d6s every round to your 1d8+2-4.

--fje

 

[starwed]

The problem with thrown weapons is that using magic weapons becomes much more problematic.

 

[Victim]

Range is often important when dealing with bombardment from flying creatures - the most common way to get potentially 100s of unobstructed feet is to go mostly up. Sure, throwing out a few weak d8+4 shots is nothing special, but it's better than just standing around complaining about how useless you are.

Other than that, javelins are pretty good. But it's even better to have both. Then you use the bow when the situation calls for extreme range, or just whip out a javelin if you come up short of melee.

Of course, the point is moot if the warblade multiclasses into a normal fighting class.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think the manuever critting text contradicts itself. Based on the comparison to sneak attack, it seems to be saying that manuevers are treated as extra "dice" even if it's a flat damage bonus on crits.

 

[Slaved]

Does everybody feel that the difference between a Javelin and a Mighty Composite Longbow is that great, in the hands of a non-build character?

Well, the weapons look something like this.......
Javelin 1gp d6(M) x2 30'(range increment) 2lbs piercing (not designed for melee, take a -4 nonproficiency to use it in melee, might not be a free action to draw I do not know because I cannot find the rule, always gets full strength bonus, since it is two handed it might take a full-round action to use and so no iterative attacks, max range increment 5)

Composite longbow 100gp(+100gp per strength bonus) d8(M) x3 110'(range increment) 3lbs piercing(ammo) (arrows are 20 for 3lbs, cannot be used in melee, free action to draw more arrows so can be used with iterative attacks, can be used while mounted, -2 penalty to attack if your strength modifier is lower than the bonus on the longbow, max range increment 10)


I would think that any combatant which is within 30' to 60' is within charging range, except maybe for the dwarven warblade above for anything beyone 40' , so ranged weapons are not helpful unless their is some other issue such as people in the way or terrain issues. If the combat is beyond that then you are looking at either very large penalties for the javelin to hit or it being simply unable to because of the range. The composite longbow can shoot almost 10 times as far as the javelin can be thrown!

If you are enlarged then you get a +2 to strength, a -2 to dexterity, a -1 to hit and a -1 to AC. For the Javelin this means you get +1 to damage and -2 to hit overall. For the composite longbow your bow changes from d8 to 2d6 damage, according to the monstrous manual, and a -2 to hit. The javelin does not get the extra die increase because of some crazy rule someone told me once that I do not remember, so it could be incorrect.

If you walk around with either a longbow out or a javelin out you are not ready for melee, although with the javelin you are in a better position. Javelin is also superior for straight strength buffs and debuffs.


If you never, or only incredibly rarely, have to worry about creatures being more than 60' away from you before you know they are hostile then the lack of ranged attacks may never matter at all. If it happens more commonly then the lack of ranged attacks will hurt more.

If all combats start so close though what do archer builds in your game do or spellcasters with long range, area of effect spells? They must be much less useful. If it is so close all of the time it would seem unlikely that anyone would even bother to carry ranged weapons, or at least not put any effort at all into making them better if they do.

Pull out the javelin and throw it or simply charge and be in melee? Forget a bow of any kind, all the enemies have to do is a move action or two and you will be needing a melee weapon out anyway.

Maybe the close range is more common with people who use battlemats?


edited.....
I am very late to the party

 

[NilesB]

Insightful Strike and critical hits

Insightful strike is a concentration check not weapon damage, it specifically disallows you from increasing it's damage with any and all effects that deal extra weapon damage. Critical hits deal extra weapon damage, they do not improve concentration checks. This is not even a litte ambiguous.

 

[Slaved]

I forgot about spells!

I am rushing out the door and likely won't have time for a couple of days but at some point I'd like to make a list of spells up to 3rd level that help teamates for which would help which character more.

Something like....
Warblade: a, b, c
Fighter/Barbarian/??: d, e, f

unless someone has a better formating idea?