Has the wave crested? (Bo9S)

[Ycore Rixle]

I have a few questions for you about Bo9S if you don't mind?

1) Why was ranged combat omitted?

That's a good question. I can only speak for myself. When I was brought on, the title of the book was already in place, minus the "Tome of Battle" part. It was a book about swords, and, in my view, a book about melee fighting. Given the word-count restraints and the size of the design space that had to be explored (the new mechanics), I thought it was reasonable to just focus on swords. In fact, I wrote the first draft of my stuff with only swords, and no other melee weapons, in mind. But it's a great point. I would love to see another book in the Tome of Battle series that focused on ranged combat. And here comes the standard disclaimer that I have no idea if WOTC is planning such a book, and I don't speak for them at all.

2) Epic level material. Why wasn't there none of this for those that wanted to take Tome of Battle past 20th-level?

My guess - and it's only a guess - is space. It was never in the Bo9S that I remember seeing, in my work or any of the other designers' work. But I don't speak for WOTC, so the real answer is, I don't know.

3) The lack of other energy-type maneuvers.

For the maneuvers I worked on, I was consciously trying to stay away from energy effects as much as possible because I wanted martial maneuvers to be more martial and less overtly magical than a wizard's spells. Fire might have snuck in there somehow, but again, beyond what I initially worked on, I can't say what the developers thought about this.

4) Will there be more support for this in WotC's Digital Initiative?

I don't know. I don't work for WOTC, I'm just a hired gun. But that's another good question. I sure hope so!

 

[Khuxan]

I'm curious... what was the warblade's original name? I've always thought "warblade" is a particularly silly name.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

I'm curious... what was the warblade's original name? I've always thought "warblade" is a particularly silly name.

I don't think I can say because it's legally the intellectual property of WOTC. That's why I didn't mention it before. Rich Baker came up with it, and maybe he can jump in here and say. But I don't want to put anything out there that WOTC might not like, so I'm going to err on the side of caution and keep mum.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

For the maneuvers I worked on, I was consciously trying to stay away from energy effects as much as possible because I wanted martial maneuvers to be more martial and less overtly magical than a wizard's spells. Fire might have snuck in there somehow, but again, beyond what I initially worked on, I can't say what the developers thought about this.

Perhaps fire was used because its one of the weakest elements (alot of creatures have resistance), So in a way it could be testing water for fighter based energy attacks. It also has a really nice connection the desert and Arabian flavor, so that was also a factor.

just making a quasi educated guess though.

 

[Arkhandus]

I just want to say 'thank you' to Frank for the Book of Nine Swords. And those other guys too I guess, whatstheirnames, that worked on it some but haven't popped in here.

 

[pawsplay]

By demonstrating that the stated (particular) apprehension isn't encompassing of the material. I don't like B, because it is all a bunch of X. I don't like X. Well, X1, X2, and X3 are actually Y. Therefor, B is not all X.

I don't recall making any such absolute statement.

Reductio. 5 yard penalty and loss of down.

What rules are you playing? In my neighborhood, if you say "reductio," we pull your shorts up. What have you got against reductio? It ain't fallacious.

This argument is, at its core, doomed from the outset. There's no way I can convince you to start liking the Bo9S regardless of how persuasively I contend against your wire-fu assertion.

"Who are you going to believe ... me, or your own eyes?"

I'm more arguing the aesthetics, and possibly looking to offer ways of seeing the material in a different, more palatable way.

... while laboring under the belief I can't look at the same book and draw different conclusions than you do.

See above. It's not like I could change your mind even if I wanted to. This is the internet: the last great bastion of self-assuredness.

*cough* I'm sorry, is there an echo in here?

For the purpose of what I was driving at, yeah, ya kinda do need to despise 'em as wire fu.

I understand the words, but not the meaning.

Why, if I may ask?

Some of your other points I even agree with you on - White Raven Tactics (the Initiative Mambo) has a great potential for abuse. I'm not a great fan of the crusader ready/recover mechanic either. Mechanical issues are a seperate matter, however.

I'm just here to offer a "nyuh uh" to the idea that if you do use the material, your game automatically turns into Kung Fu Hustle or House of Flying Daggers d20.

Is too!

Wow, didn't expect a dev to come diving into this. Very interesting stuff, and thanks, Ycore Rixle!

 

[pawsplay]

I'm curious... what was the warblade's original name? I've always thought "warblade" is a particularly silly name.

"Peaceblade" was already taken, obviously.

 

[Thurbane]

Book of Nine Sword: the Tome of Battle.

I wanted to hate it, and ended up loving it.

I was the opposite. I recently traded in Bo9S and Magic of Incarnum for a discount on Cityscape and Dungeonscape.

 

[pawsplay]

I was the opposite. I recently traded in Bo9S and Magic of Incarnum for a discount on Cityscape and Dungeonscape.

Aha! I knew there had to be some out there.

 

[Khuxan]

I don't think I can say because it's legally the intellectual property of WOTC. That's why I didn't mention it before. Rich Baker came up with it, and maybe he can jump in here and say. But I don't want to put anything out there that WOTC might not like, so I'm going to err on the side of caution and keep mum.

Fair enough. I've shot Rich a private message, so hopefully he'll pop in and tell us.