Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thanatos" data-source="post: 3044542" data-attributes="member: 5261">Fairness is objective, but I was speaking specifically in relation that the ability in question was the equivilent of a 9th level spell. Power Word: Kill (kills a creature with 100 hit points or less). In that regards, it is a fair comparison. I was not making a "fair" comparison about the two classes.Comparitavely speaking though, your example looks like like how I have seen the barbarian vs wizard often described. It's difficult to really compare casting to melee classes with a high degree of accuracy.Lets compare, because I think you are generalizing too much, 17th level:Wizard: 4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1Warblade: 6 manuevers readied for combat/4 stances known (only 1 can be used at a time, but switching between is a swift action)Yes, he can get back his expended maneuvers with a swift action in combat, but can only make a single standard non-initiated attack in that round (or none at all). That turns out to be alot of missed DPS if I remember my fighter/barbarian comparisons correctly. Not all of his 6 combat abilities are going to be just about damage either -- there are other actions he will likely have readied involving movement or improving ally abilities, etc, nor will the rest of his damage maneuvers come close to that level of damage.You can use recharge rules from Unearthed Arcana to simulate recovering your "spells" between combats, just like the classes in this book. So all things CAN be even there. It's like how the 9 swords in the book use Weapons of Legacy rules, it makes certain assumptions (just like most books). Even without recharge, the wizard is still far more powerful overall then the warblade. I don't agree that the class abilities giving back maneuvers for combat are really any more broken then quite a number of other class abilities given.The wizard still has far more versatility with his spells, not to mention alot more then the warblade does with his maneuvers...outside of combat, he's pretty much just got his skills to rely on to do things. Even in combat, he still can't do the sheer damage a wizard can do with AoE, either. I don't agree that is a fair or accurate representation of the maneuvers and how they work, though using combat maneuvers outside of combat is a glaring spot thats not really covered I've noticed. This book has quite a bit of errata and missed things in it. Still though, going by how something is worded, you could use these combat maneuvers (such as the ones designed for movement) outside of combat 1 time and until you get in another encounter or a day passes, they are expendted. That wouldn't seem to have the blanket utility of a feat.Well, I am kind of boggled at some of the abilities of some of the classes as well, such as the "Sense Magic" (learn ALL properties of a magic item after 10 minutes of study) or the "+1 to initiative" (when Improved Initiative makes more sense) of the Swordsage got though...after all, how can a 7th level Swordsage do what a wizard HAS to use a spell for do? The interesting thing about the high Int-bonus class features though, is it will take away from some of the other capabilities a warblade can do. The different disciplines usually rely on different skills (like Tumble for Desert Wind or Concentration for Diamond Mind), so to be extremely effective, he is still going to have to focus his skill points and the number of disiplines he will shine in. I don't like the fact he can change his weapon specalization as a class skill though...if he can do it, I believe a fighter should be able to do it as well (and as a matter of fact, I will be allowing them to do so in my campaigns).There ARE some disappointing factors in the book -- but like anything, cooperatively working with a DM can usually fix these things. I don't think I've ever found a book I use 100% the way written as inevitably something I want to use is too generalized or has abilities that make no sense and need to be changed, or is too underpowered/overpowered, etc.Even fighters and barbarians with access to the newer feats in Complete Warrior and PHB II can do comparitively well against the warblade and wizards...take a gander on the WotC boards, there were quite a few comparisons there...someone did a spreadsheet even.Though I completely agree with PHB feats alone, the melee classes are totally overwhelmed. You have to expand and use other books to keep all things, roughly, in the same categories. I was on the bandwagon about this book being completely broken...till I really started to read the threads and get it and build up some characters using the extra source materials (PHB II, Completes, etc.).Like I said earlier though, this isn't going to be a book for every campaign. Its better suited for a high magic/high powered game. Iron Heroes is a much tamer alternative that seems better suited to those grittier or low magic campaigns. I'm sorr you feel it is so broken and unbalanced <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> I just don't agree...I hope I shed some light as to why I disagree. Different strokes and all, so its all good <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification