1) Yes, I still play fighters, paladins, rangers and such. But I do prefer the Bo9S classes when they're available in the campaign, not too unfamiliar to the DM, and not inappropriate or awkward for the setting in use. Mind you, so much of 3.5's material is overpowered at this point, that it's really kinda necessary to just keep up with the spellcasters, knights, and such.
2) Swordsage. It's flexible, it's got decent skill points/class skills, it's kinda monk-like but also kind of swashbucklery and kind of ninja-like and kind of samurai-like. And it's the most balanced of the Bo9S classes, for sure. The maneuver recovery mechanic is really harsh, and even in the campaign I DM where Adaptive Style is interpreted as fully readying maneuvers for use (effectively like recovering them, not just changing them around uselessly), it's still not overpowering so far in my experience (just good, but not necessary unless the swordsage gets caught in long battles frequently).
The party's druid and cleric were each doing as much or more damage per round with even more brutal accuracy (I've had to min-max many of the enemies' attack bonuses/AC just to make them even the slightest bit challenging, and not for the party's swordsage, but for the divine masters of smack!).
3) For low levels, I'm partial to Shadow Blade Technique and Martial Spirit. The former is really nice for getting a better chance of hitting tough enemies or overcoming bad lulck with dice rolls, and the latter has saved my Crusader and his allies at 1st and 2nd level in a mini-campaign that had no clerics or other healers in the vicinity. Adrock, a dumb but well-meaning brute in service to Kord the Brawler, healed with
violence, and it was glorious.
Burning Blade is very nice too for a low-level Swordsage when he runs into big nasties that need to die
right now.
Overall, I think I like Pearl of Black Doubt and Insightful Strike the best. PoBD is the favorite stance of the party's Swordsage in the game I DM on Thursdays, and many a foe has whiffed helplessly with blade and claw at that Swordsage while he dodges merrily aside. It's nice for a character that focuses on a solid defense, and makes it reasonably viable in combination with Zephyr Dance or Baffling Defense or similar. Insightful Strike is very effective sometimes but not always, and is a solid maneuver for its level. Ballista Throw gets an honorable mention just for being absolutely insane (....a goblin swordsage in my game threw the party's Swordsage as a projectile at half the group, and there was no saving throw allowed to avoid it....).
Five-Shadow Creeping Ice Enervation Strike gets honorable mention just cuz I like its name and its effects, even if it isn't the most effective 9th-level maneuver out there.
4) There's hardly any comparison. The core warrior classes have been weak for at least the past few editions of D&D, though useful as meat shields, and 3E at least made them reasonably viable. Some of them actually manage to be decent offensive tanks, but they're still very limited in tactics and strength. A fighter made with access to every official 3E/3.5E supplement could be fairly strong, but would still be inferior to a cleric, druid, sorcerer, wizard, crusader, swordsage, or warblade in power and flexibility. Barbarians match up well against martial adepts in terms of damage output and toughness, but lack the flexibility, and may also lack some accuracy by comparison to some warblades. Fighters and paladins are inferior to barbarians mechanically, and are even more inferior to martial adepts. Rangers are a bit closer in flexibility and power, but still also inferior to some extent. Monks are the weakest warrior class in the PHB, unless you count bards, in which case they're tied for weakest. An ineptly handled swordsage is
at least as effective as an expertly-handled monk, if not outright
better than him.
