Bo9S

[ivocaliban]

What kind of reception did it get?

If I recall, the reception was very, very mixed. The extremes of best thing ever and worst thing ever about equally represented.

It seems strange to me that they would go ahead with it with such a mixed reaction

Let me preface this by saying that I don't have the Bo9S.

My understanding is that the biggest complaint about the Bo9S is how it pushed the Fighter class into the ditch. So I assume the majority of those who think it's "the best thing ever" found the options therein better than a feat-laden Fighter, while those who found it to be the "worst thing ever" would have rather seen improvements to the Fighter class instead of new classes and the introduction of maneuvers.

 

[AnonymousOne]

My understanding is that the biggest complaint about the Bo9S is how it pushed the Fighter class into the ditch. So I assume the majority of those who think it's "the best thing ever" found the options therein better than a feat-laden Fighter, while those who found it to be the "worst thing ever" would have rather seen improvements to the Fighter class instead of new classes and the introduction of maneuvers.

This might be a valid argument if you ignored all of the Fighter Feats from the splatbooks (CW, CA, PHBII, etc.)

 

[Nifft]

My understanding is that the biggest complaint about the Bo9S is how it pushed the Fighter class into the ditch.

The Fighter class was born in a ditch. Feats are a sucky class feature in the long term. Fighters have always been inferior to Barbarians, Clerics and Druids.

The PHB-II changed the equation slightly: it's always been nice to take two levels of Fighter; now it's nice to take two or four, because Weapon Specialization is no longer useless -- rather, it's a gateway feat to one of the Weapon Mastery feats.

What the Bo9S did was to create a system other than spellcasting which was effective while not requiring that you Rage and get off a full attack.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Dice4Hire]

The Fighter is still in the ditch, as the warblade can take fighter feats, including specialization, just a couple of levels later. When 3.0 came out, the designers thought feats were going to be more powerful than they were, but then again, in 3.0 there were not prestige classes or other classes that granted extra feats, so the non-fighter got 7 or so, and the fighter got 15 or more.

But the warblade is superior to the Fighter in every single way, except maybe a fighter who wants to do weapon specialization and another feat chain like Spring attack at the same time. Of course the warblade will still kick that fighter to the curb, it just cannot duplicate it easily.

But then again, comparing something to the weakest class in the PHB, i would hope anything else would be superior

 

[WhatGravitas]

Yes, while the book is full of great crunch and less... great flavour (I love the book, but I have a certain disdain for the flavour...), the organization IS messy. But these printable, free manoeuvre cards are great. Use them... it makes a lot of things easier!

Cheers, LT.

 

[Shadeydm]

Yes, while the book is full of great crunch and less... great flavour (I love the book, but I have a certain disdain for the flavour...), the organization IS messy. But these printable, free manoeuvre cards are great. Use them... it makes a lot of things easier!

Cheers, LT.

Sweet!
Thanks man!

 

[Khairn]

I liked the Bo9S, although I do agree that its presentation and organization was poor at best.

Now I don't agree with all the "fighters' suk" comments as I've played the class and seen them played with consistently effective and devastating effect. Of course I don't quite understand the "bards' suk" crowd either.

 

[Moggthegob]

Really. The weakest class in the PHb.
To be honest, other than cleric20 i have seen more fighter 20 builds than nay other class. IMO it kicks the babrarians ass in most if not all ways once you leave 4th level. It can do all sorts of cool things without being pigeonholed into a corner. i would consider the monk and the ranger the two weakest classes in the PHB simply due to thier inability to fill a role on their own(i.e. like a bard they are 5th characters).

The biggest complaint i have heard about it is that it caters to the instant gratification crowd. I mean most classes are frontloaded but honestly not dippng a couple levels into warblade is stupid. But flavorfully i do not have campaign where they would ever fit. Which to me seems to be a problem

I think the feeling is that they replace 3 different classes in terms of power but in terms of gameplay are actually lesser classes due to the nature of their powers.

Plus I would contend the feat is still immensely powerful when used with any sort of rhyme and reason when selecting them. Close Quarters combat, The Shield Specialization line, Whirlwind attack, Elusive Target, combat Brute, Karmic Strike, Robilar's Gambit, and Shock trooper.

Most of these are kickin feats that make any fighter cooler. And alot of them are emulated by maneuvers which really is a kick in the face for the fighter who had to invest feats to get them.

 

[saucercrab]

Yes, while the book is full of great crunch and less... great flavour (I love the book, but I have a certain disdain for the flavour...), the organization IS messy. But these printable, free manoeuvre cards are great. Use them... it makes a lot of things easier!

Cheers, LT.

Yeah, love those for my crusader. During combat, 's like I'm using tarot cards to determine an enemy's future (how it will get hurt).
"Ooh, the Divine Surge of good was uncovered. Very shortly, that mind flayer will suffer a red-ass beatdown from the servant of a very wrathful god."

 

[Shadeydm]

Anyone else find it odd that two of the nine "swords" are daggers?