My Gut Reaction to Book of Nine Swords

[JustKim]

I'm surprised to hear the lack of love for Tome of Battle. This is the first book that I've loved in a while.

Oh, don't worry. The negative voices in this thread are very much a minority. Bo9S is a pretty beloved book.

 

[Hussar]

Disclaimer: I do not own either of the books I'm about to talk about and all my knowledge is second hand.

It seems to me that BO9S is similar to Iron Heroes in many respects. It allows characters to do (pretty much) magic things without magic items. Fighter types get a massive boost which they really, really needed.

Now, if you think that fighters are perfectly fine, then I imagine that both Iron Heroes and this book are not going to be your cup of tea.

I have to admit, the more vociferous the negative voices get, the more impressed I am getting with this book. I mean, if people have to try that hard to get anyone to agree with them, there definitely must be something worth reading in the book.

 

[Sejs]

So... can I have your copy then, Airwalkerr?

 

[gribble]

I have to admit, the more vociferous the negative voices get, the more impressed I am getting with this book. I mean, if people have to try that hard to get anyone to agree with them, there definitely must be something worth reading in the book.

I hope I'm not being lumped in with the "negative voices". Personally I *love* the book, and I'm definitely in the camp of the people who think it's one of the best books to come out of WotC in ages (along with Tome of Magic, which unfortunately had balance issues in the other direction for 2 out of its 3 classes).
In fact, I don't even think the maneuvers are unbalanced, and two of the classes appear to be fine. I haven't fine-tooth combed the PrCs, but they look to be pretty good as well on a casual perusal.
The *only* problem I have with book is the warblade, and not because I dislike the class, just because I feel it's a little over the top. I mean, if I didn't like it, I wouldn't be so concerned about trying to find a "fix" to balance it out a bit.


Well, I do have one other minor quibble: the fact that the (brief) rules for the Weapons of Legacy *still* haven't done anything to clarify the whole least/lesser/greater legacy feat/abilites thing...

 

[amethal]

So... can I have your copy then, Airwalkerr?

No, because then he'd have to buy another one to complete his collection of D&D books.

I was hoping WotC would bring out Tome of Battle 2, Tome of Battle 3 etc. but now I think that would just be cruel.

 

[Soel]

I'm afraid to ask, but how do you want to spice up the fighter class (and I don't mean latinizing him)?

Well, before this book (and PH2) came out, I was thinking along the lines of giving fighters a list (ala the rogue) of options at higher levels akin to tactical feats (good things, but their sometimes limited/highly specific use brings them into the areas of "why did I bother choosing this one?) and non-combat choices they could pick from. Possibly even something as simple as giving the fighter more skills and skill points would have been fine.

 

[Kishin]

Of course, take without give is acceptable if it addresses some extant discrepency, but I do not see how anyone can suggest that a non-caster class such as fighter, barbarian, or rogue are underpowered. Satori, you're familiar with my regard for the resource-management element of the game. Perhaps you're also acquainted with the value I place on the related concept of party roles and interdependency. I've seen that the designation of a mage as high-offense/low-defense is already in question when a holy-keen-greatsword-wielding warrior is going to town. I do not think there needs to be a power boost.

If all Fighters can do is Fight, and Mages and Clerics can simulate their ability in doing so well with a spell (Tenser's Transformation and Divine Power, the latter of which is available rather early), they're already worming their way into that Fighter's 'party role'. But that's a relatively minor fault.

If your mage's offensive power is being surpassed by a Fighter with a greatsword, then your mage is poor one. Sure, the Fighter may do more HP damage per hit, but anyone will tell you that blasting isn't where the power lies at higher levels. After a certain point, Save or Die becomes a dominant force, and well, a Fighter can't exactly Weird and cause everything in 30 feet to drop dead. Nor can he remove an opponent from the fight near permanently unless they lack two specific spells, or a companion with those spells (Forcecage). Additionally, a Fighter against an opponent wielding these effects is virtually helpless. You can argue that dealing with spellcasters isn't their 'party role', but it doesn't change the fact that its not very fun when in a magic-enabled fight (which only increase in frequency as level increases), the fighter's party role becomes 'be rendered helpless and/or die.'

But as you said, you simply don't see it that way, and never will, no matter how much you read the book or how much people explain it to you. I've yet to see anyone change anyone else's opinion on matters like this if they don't want it to be changed.

(P.S. On a related note to the earlier mention of Forcecage, one of the greatest things I think ToB introduces is the manuever Iron Heart Surge, which when expended, effectively negates the effect of a single spell presently active on the user, finally giving melee characters a chance something to do against Forcecage or Evard's Black Tentacles other than stand there and die.)

 

[Thanatos]

The *only* problem I have with book is the warblade, and not because I dislike the class, just because I feel it's a little over the top. I mean, if I didn't like it, I wouldn't be so concerned about trying to find a "fix" to balance it out a bit.


Well, I do have one other minor quibble: the fact that the (brief) rules for the Weapons of Legacy *still* haven't done anything to clarify the whole least/lesser/greater legacy feat/abilites thing...

So far the warblade we have in a test campaign isn't really coming up overpowered compared to the fighter. One thing though I really dislike is the warblades ability to change out his weapons he has under focus, specialization and such...we've given the fighter the ability to do the same thing. So far our general consensus is that a few minor tweaks is about the most any class in the book needs. But this is in a standard D&D setting.

I *hate* the whole weapons of legacy rules. I did get the book and it has alot of good concepts and ideas in it, but I don't like the costs. Call me old school, I think it should just cost experience and gold. Some of the tests we ran with it took this great weapon and through loss of our characters skills and vital stats, basically reduced its overall power, so it seemed a bit bizzare to do that.

That being said...the least/lesser/greater legacy feats open up the different levels of abilities.

5-10 = least feat
11-16 = lesser feat
17-20 greater feat

You automatically gain the feats for free based on the ritual you do. So if you do it at 5th level, you get the least feat and unlock all the abilities of the weapon up to level 10, but you can't use those unlocked abilities until you attain a level equal to that ability. The rituals themselves are listed by DC in book under each weapon.

Hope that helps...let me know if it doesn't.

 

[lukelightning]

Every time I see the title I think it's "Book of Ninja Swords."

 

[Ranger REG]

Well, before this book (and PH2) came out, I was thinking along the lines of giving fighters a list (ala the rogue) of options at higher levels akin to tactical feats (good things, but their sometimes limited/highly specific use brings them into the areas of "why did I bother choosing this one?) and non-combat choices they could pick from. Possibly even something as simple as giving the fighter more skills and skill points would have been fine.

You mean a fighter variant, like in one of them Dragon magazine articles? I know I used that concept to create a samurai fighter variant and posted it up on the Wizards' messageboards a few years ago.

I do agree with you, fighters need fighter-only feat at higher level.