I find this a good thing. It means the book is doing it's job about being a fresh new take on warriors.
Or that the classes from the book blow other martial classes out of the water.
I find this a good thing. It means the book is doing it's job about being a fresh new take on warriors.
monboesen said:Or that the classes from the book blow other martial classes out of the water.
"A fresh new take", eh?Mort said:I find this a good thing. It means the book is doing it's job about being a fresh new take on warriors.
So far as I can tell, the martial disciplines provide all kinds of insane ways to inflict gross damage with a single attack. BoBS advocates tend to portray that as a wash because you don't get a full round of attacks, but they don't take it into context how much better is to throw a pile of damage in one attack than it is to make a full round of attacks. So, we're back to "my god, that's huge" territory.Mort said:People tend to look at the abilities in a vacuum and go "My god, that's huge" but when taken in context (most abilities take a standard action[no full attack], some have significant AC penalties, the save ones can be used only once per round and prevent any other counters) they are not nearly as "huge" as they look.
Bingo.monboesen said:Or that the classes from the book blow other martial classes out of the water.
welby said:Crusader or Warblade do sound nice. Does anyone have any experience with these classes? Crusader in particular seems like a lot of book keeping to figure out which maneuver you can use. Are they good classes to multiclass? I was thinking maybe taking a few levels of crusader and then going for another class or PrC. Something like 3clr/3crus/-> pious templar. Do you think there's more tanky goodness by staying crusader all the way up?
Point taken.Gumby said:Good thing you can always make up a new thread to discuss this in then, instead of derailing one that was going pretty well without you.