Warblade maneuvers

[hong]

My bad. I thought we were talking about the hypothetical level 20 warblade.

If the caster is using "dominate person" he can only cast one of it,

If we are talking about the hypothetical 20th level caster, this is nonsense.

Assuming unfairly that the caster can keep casting his "saving throw" spells.

You mean, as in all of them? What else is he going to do, poke you with a stick?

The warblade can recover his expended maneuver and at the same time wail at the caster; the caster on the otherhand will have to spend 8 hours resting to recover all those spells he blew away at the warblade.

In any one fight, the fact that the caster has a per-day ration makes little difference. Any caster has way more spells than the warblade has maneuvers, and only the issue of keeping some for later fights keeps him from blowing them all in one go.

Which is what in this scenario I was assuming the caster was doing. I would ready my maneuvers entirely on what type of situation I was expecting.

So then he hits you again NEXT round. Yeesh.

Iron heart surge can also help the warblade save against 90% of the "save or lose" spells the wizard could toss at him.

... at the cost of using an action. This is a huge factor. Now granted, that's an action that he probably wouldn't have anyway without iron heart surge, but it does mean that the warblade can't just shrug off the effect. At high levels combat is all about speed; who can do the most things in the shortest time. Stamina is a secondary consideration.

What breaks the game to the Warblade's favour when he's engaged with the wizard at this game is that he can recover his maneuvers as a swift action, thereby outpacing the wizard.

Have you actually played a high-level warblade?

 

[Zephiel7]

Seeing how Star Wars Saga uses more generic classes along with talent trees, just like D20 Modern, I can see that, together with the whole ToB system (with some adjustments) being the next incarnation of D&D:

Each class will get bonus feats, talents, stances (or something like them, with another name), and "FX".

Feats will be used for pretty generic stuff, to lessen penalties (like weapon proficiency does), and grant very standard, and universally applicable benefits (like 3e weapon focus). Nothing class-specific here. Meta-magic would be in here, if it stays in that edition. All of the benefits are active all the time, or can be used as often as you want, usually without too much of an extra effort in actions)

Talents are mostly class-specific things, also active all the time, but not quite as powerful as FX or stances. Sometimes the power level is just lower than an FX you could get at this level (eldritch blast over fireball), or there are some restrictions narrowing down its use (favoured enemy only working against one creature type).

Stances would be much like talents, except a bit (or even a lot) stronger. Also things that are active all the time, but not necessarily limited. The catch is that you only have one of these active at any given time.

FX would be manoeuvres, spells, that kind of stuff. You would know a certain number of those (maybe you can expand your collection beyond what the class gives you, like a wizard and his spells), and have another certain number of them readied. As soon as you fire off one of those, it's gone for that encounter (but maybe some classes can ready their fx several times), unless you do whatever your class says you need to do to get them back on the fly.
Spellcasters could have limitations on the power levels readied, like only one of their most potent fx (or only one augmented to its full), and others being weaker.


As an example, take healing:
There would be a healing talent tree, open to those classes that are into that stuff. There would be talents to grant fast healing to others (all the time, but how much fast healing or to how many depends on level and/or number of talents invested).

There might be a stance improving on this.

The healing FX would give you the ability to heal great amounts of damage at once, maybe healing several people at once, but the wounds would have to be fairly recent, like no more than one minute old.

I find myself agreeing with much of what you stated.

A. Your point about feats makes sense; it should be related to the more mundane facets of a character that can - even in real life - seem pseudo plausible. In terms of feats though, I think the fighter classes should not only get more of them, but should get better feats as well.

B. Your vision of "talents" seems to be identical to class abilities. I am really indifferent to your application opposed to how WOTC applies the concept.

C. I think metamagic feats could be thought of as a "stance" a mage could take with a spell. Spell focus and penetration also seem to have very "stance like" effects when it comes to casting.

D. I agree with most of what you state here. If I could add my two cents, a fighter's "supernatural/legendary" pool of abilities should differ from a wizards in that it's associated with steady damage out put and tanking - and by tanking I not only mean resisting melee attacks, but also resisting spells intended for the group. A fighter should be better at that type of stuff because he is - naturally - made of "sterner stuff," which should apply to a spell that would normally dominate a weaker person's mind. In general, I think the wizards "supernatural/legendary" pool of abilities - what have you - should be noticeably stronger, and fantastic than what a melee class would get, but consequently harder to recover.

 

[starwed]

AFAIK the saving throw counters don't let you know what you're saving against; unless you've put some ranks into spellcraft (which I assume is crossclass?) then the wizard can bait you with a quickened charm person spell before hitting you with dominate. (They could even use a quickened daze, I suppose.)

 

[Zephiel7]

You mean, as in all of them?

No, I mean, he'll need 8 hours to recover all his spells. 8 hours he doesn't get in this particular scenario.

In any one fight, the fact that the caster has a per-day ration makes little difference. Any caster has way more spells than the warblade has maneuvers, and only the issue of keeping some for later fights keeps him from blowing them all in one go.

That doesn't eliminate the fact that warblade can recover his maneuvers easily, which is the basis of my argument.

You're also assuming that the warblade is sitting in a corner and doing absolutely nothing while the caster is throwing everything he has. After using two immediate actions to save against two dominate persons, or one dominate person and a wail of the banshee - what have you, the warblade could initiate a more powerful maneuver and squish the caster.

If you are imagining a scenario where the caster is flying, then the warblade could switch to a ranged weapon in order to equalize the situation while using maneuvers in order to buy time until the flight spell wears off. Better yet, magic is not only available to the caster alone, there are plenty of flight potions or items that a twentieth level warblade would have in his/her possession. Not assuming any of these advantages for a warblade is like not assuming that the wizard has all his material components or spell book available.

So then he hits you again NEXT round. Yeesh.

Assuming that you don't "hit" him first and end the battle. With the higher level maneuvers, the wizard in question is not going to survive past first turn, especially since the warblade will probably be getting the higher initiative roll.

... at the cost of using an action. This is a huge factor. Now granted, that's an action that he probably wouldn't have anyway without iron heart surge, but it does mean that the warblade can't just shrug off the effect.

In seems you were misinterpreting my position. I was not saying that a warblade is relying purely on staying power; just that if he were engaged in a duel against a wizard, he would be prepared enough in case his initiative roll was "lackluster." It provides the required defenses to rectify the situation.

At high levels combat is all about speed; who can do the most things in the shortest time. Stamina is a secondary consideration.

I don't know about you, sir, but "pouncing charge" with "raging mongoose" and "boots of haste" gives the warblade 9 attacks - attacks that will probably kill the mage in question. My twentieth level warblade build had "feral death blow" which automatically kills a character on a DC 19 + strength mod/ fortitude saving throw negates - which might I add I do not see a wizard making.

 

[hong]

No, I mean, he'll need 8 hours to recover all his spells. 8 hours he doesn't get in this particular scenario.

Why not?

That doesn't eliminate the fact that warblade can recover his maneuvers easily, which is the basis of my argument.

At this stage, I'm no longer sure what it is you're arguing. Are you saying the warblade class, as a whole, is broken? Or are you saying that this specific aspect of the warblade is broken? Or what?

You're also assuming that the warblade is sitting in a corner and doing absolutely nothing while the caster is throwing everythign he has. After using two immediate actions to save against two dominate persons, or one dominate person and a wail of the banshee - what have you, the warblade could initiate time stands still and squish the caster.

Which is why a smart caster does not stick around in full attack range of a melee brute, no matter what class. Try standing 5 feet away from a raging barbarian and see how long you last. Time stands still may be broken, but that's an issue entirely separate to the warblade.

If you are imagining a scenario where the caster is flying, then the warblade could switch to a ranged weapon in order to equalize the situation while using maneuvers in order to buy time until the flight spell wears off.

Check out the ranged proficiencies that the warblade gets.

Assuming that you don't "hit" him first and end the battle. With the higher level maneuvers, the wizard in question is not going to survive past first turn, especially since the warblade will probably be getting the higher initiative roll.

Why?

In seems you were misinterpreting my position. I was not saying that a warblade is relying on staying power; just that if he were engaged in a duel against a wizard, he would be prepared enough in case his initiative roll was "lackluster." It provides the required defenses to rectify the situation.

If this is the stereotypical 20th level one-on-one duel, with both sides prepped and no other fights to worry about, whoever wins init... wins.

I don't know about you, sir, but "pouncing charge" with "raging mongoose" and "boots of haste" gives the warblade 9 attacks

7.

- attacks that will probably kill the mage in question. My twentieth level warblade build had "feral death blow" which automatically kills a character on a DC 19 + strength mod/ fortitude saving throw negates - which might I add I do not see a wizard making.

Which is why a wizard build concentrates on not having to make that save, by virtue of things like displacement, invisibility and super-high AC. And this has what, exactly, to do with recovering maneuvers?

 

[Zephiel7]

Why not?

Because he's fighting? Sorry, I don't understand....

At this stage, I'm no longer sure what it is you're arguing. Are you saying the warblade class, as a whole, is broken? Or are you saying that this specific aspect of the warblade is broken? Or what?

It seems, there was mutual confusion. I assumed you were arguing that any level 20 caster could take down any level 20 warblade? Your initial response seemed to imply that much.

Which is why a smart caster does not stick around in full attack range of a melee brute, no matter what class. Try standing 5 feet away from a raging barbarian and see how long you last. Time stands still may be broken, but that's an issue entirely separate to the warblade.

But how does he afford that movement? Are you assuming he uses a standard action to fly, and another standard action launching a charm person? The warblade could resort to ranged weaponry and wait it out, or better yet - on the basis that both characters are conferred the same advantages with respect to equipment and items - he could simply drink a potion of flight or use i items to follow the caster.

Check out the ranged proficiencies that the warblade gets.

Throwing weapons are still in. Also, taking a proficiency feat or starting as an elf could nullify these disadvantages.

7.

My mistake, I was thinking of two weapon wielding mixed in but not counting the off hand and for some reason I thought haste would give two extra attacks as well.

Why?

By the fact he has improved initiative as a bonus feat, and a higher dexterity.

Which is why a wizard build concentrates on not having to make that save, by virtue of things like displacement, invisibility and super-high AC. And this has what, exactly, to do with recovering maneuvers?

Have you taken a look at the material component required for displacement? If we are assuming that the wizard has a "small strip of leather from the hide of a displacer beast" then we should just as easily assume that a warblade has a potion of true seeing. Even in the case of invisibility, the warblade has blind fight as a bonus feat to fight the wizard in question. Also, how does the wizard manage all of this and at the same time cast a spell at the warblade? He'd have to compromise one for the other, which the warblade can exploit in either scenario.

Recovering maneuvers just shows to illustrate that even if the warblade were having a run of terrible luck, he can still find a steady way of resisting spells - at the very least - until the wizards luck starts going sour.

 

[hong]

Because he's fighting?

And you assume a caster has only a handful of spells when fighting... why?

It seems, there was mutual confusion. I thought you were arguing over the fact that any level 20 caster could take down any level 20 warblade? I was arguing contrary to that, which is the position I assumed you were taking.

Try keeping track of your own position some time. I am not saying a 20th level wiz will pwn a 20th level warblade. I am also not saying a 20th level warblade will pwn a 20th level wiz. I am saying that both sides have what they need to take down the other, if luck goes their way.

But how does he afford that movement? Are you assuming he uses a standard action to fly, and another standard action launching a charm person?

You MOVE and you CAST. This is not hard.

Throwing weapons are still in.

Have you ever used throwing weapons in D&D?

Also, taking a proficiency feat or starting as an elf could nullify these disadvantages.

A warblade using ranged weapons is basically a nerfed fighter.

By the fact he has improved initiative as a bonus feat,

And the wizard will not have Imp Init, why? (IME the classes most likely to have Imp Init are casters and rogues, for the precise reason that they're the ones most well-equipped to pull off one-shot kills.)

and a higher dexterity.

Why?

Have you taken a look at the material component required for displacement?

. . .

At this stage, it's starting to sound very much like you're arguing for the sake of arguing.

Also, how does the wizard manage all of this and at the same time cast a spell at the warblade? He'd have to compromise one for the other, which the warblade can exploit in either scenario.

WTF?

Recovering maneuvers just shows to illustrate that even if the warblade were having a run of terrible luck, he can still recover those maneuvers - at the very least - and use them until the wizards luck starts going sour.

All while having his hit points being beaten down. Which is to say, while being able to recover maneuvers quickly is nice, by no means does it make things a foregone conclusion.

 

[Zephiel7]

And you assume a caster has only a handful of spells when fighting... why?

I didn't state that a caster only has a handful of spells. Just that his spells do not grant him a definite advantage against a class that can easily recover expended maneuvers designed to resist those spells.

Try keeping track of your own position some time.

I thought my position was rather clear when I stated that a warblade could stand toe to toe against a caster a few posts ago.

I am not saying a 20th level wiz will pwn a 20th level warblade. I am also not saying a 20th level warblade will pwn a 20th level wiz. I am saying that both sides have what they need to take down the other, if luck goes their way.

Which, as I stated above, was my position.

You MOVE and you CAST. This is not hard.

Which limits you to one spell - maybe two at the very most.

Have you ever used throwing weapons in D&D?

Nice, aren't they?

A warblade using ranged weapons is basically a nerfed fighter.

Granted, but they still do enough that five attacks from a longbow can seriously damage a flying wizard.

And the wizard will not have Imp Init, why? (IME the classes most likely to have Imp Init are casters and rogues, for the precise reason that they're the ones most well-equipped to pull off one-shot kills.)

Granted. If you take a look at my post a page back, I stated that the warblade in question was elven and would have his secondary score being dexterity (implied) due to the fact he was relying on bow and arrow as a means of attack.

Why?

See above.

. . .

At this stage, it's starting to sound very much like you're arguing for the sake of arguing.

Nonsense. I was stating that if the mage had the material component required to cast displacement, then what would stop the warblade from having a potion of clarity? It seems absurd to confer one side with advantages with regards to items and equipments while witholding the advantage of proper equipment to the other side.

WTF?

What's so confusing? You stated that the mage would be able to cast a spell at the warblade AND cast invisibility mixed in with displacement. I was simply countering that point by stating it would not be possible in one round.

All while having his hit points being beaten down.

Assuming the mage spends that action laying the beat down on the warblade instead of casting a "save" spell.


Either way, this argument is really going no where. Since we both stated that we basically agreed with one another a couple of posts ago, lets leave it at that.

 

[hong]

I didn't state that a caster only has a handful of spells. Just that his spells do not grant him a definite advantage against a class that can easily recover expended maneuvers designed to resist those spells.

And this is a bad thing, why?

Which limits you to one spell - maybe two at the very most.

Well, yes. What else are you going to do, besides move and cast?

Nice, aren't they?

No.

Granted, but they still do enough that five attacks from a longbow can seriously damage a flying wizard.

You should actually try playing a high-level wizard some time. A twinked _archer_ getting 5 attacks can seriously damage a flying wizard, yes. A twinked melee guy using a bow as a secondary weapon, not so much.

Granted. If you take a look at my post a page back, I stated that the warblade in question was elven and would be dexterity based due to the fact he was relying on bow and arrow as a secondary means of attack.

If you are going to use a bow, that makes you a less twinked warblade with your primary class feature in the first place, and so again nothing is broken. In particular, spending the gp to enchant up both a melee weapon _and_ a ranged weapon is going to be fun for you.

See above.

Most top-level wizards I've seen have Dex at least 20, and usually around 24. Are you really going to pump that much into Dex when you're playing a class whose primary feature revolves around melee?

Nonsense. I was stating that if the mage had the material component required to cast displacement, then what would stop the warblade from having a potion of clarity?

If by "clarity" you mean "true strike"... that's spending one round to quaff, and another round to attack. And displacement keeps going and going, while true strike works for one attack only. See above re speed being everything at high levels.

(Using multiple potions of true strike is not a winning proposition, no.)

What's so confusing? You stated that the mage would be able to cast a spell at the warblade AND cast invisibility mixed in with displacement. I was simply countering that point by stating it would not be possible in one round.

Prep time. The ace in the hole for a wizard is time to prepare. You do not go into a duel with nothing up, and spend the first 5 rounds buffing.

Really, try playing (or watching) a high-level wiz some time. It's a completely different play style, and might affect your perspective on how these things pan out.

Assuming the mage spends that action laying the beat down on the warblade instead of casting a "save" spell.

The mage spends that action laying the beatdown on the warblade BY casting a spell, which might or might not have a save attached. Heavens above, do you actually think "beating down" an opponent for a wiz means hitting them with a sharp stick?

 

[hong]

Most top-level wizards I've seen have Dex at least 20, and usually around 24. Are you really going to pump that much into Dex when you're playing a class whose primary feature revolves around melee?

And in fact, _I_ would, but then I'm special.