Strike of Righteous Vitality for a Warblade

[Victim]

A Crusader can already recycle his manuevers about as quickly, and when continually using manuevers.

 

[Egres]

A Crusader can already recycle his manuevers about as quickly

How?

 

[Nail]

It sounds fine to me. The ability to cast a 6th level spell under limited circumstances at 17th level doesn't sound over-powered to me.

You might be missing this: You could easily use this outside of combat. Easily.

After all, if you actually wanted to use strike of righteous vitality every other round, you would be limited to attacking once per round instead of getting your full attacks..

You can recharge and still do a Full Round Attack action.

 

[Nail]

Just ask your Wiz ally to summon a monster to attack you.

Fortunately, that at least costs some kind of resource.....not enough, of course.

Surely most DMs would not allow this use.....

 

[3d6]

Just ask your Wiz ally to summon a monster to attack you.

If that's a balance problem, then the problem is with the maneuver, not the warblade. A crusader could do that as well.

 

[Nifft]

You might be missing this: You could easily use this outside of combat. Easily.

How, please? If you're hitting something that "poses a real, immediate threat", I think it qualifies as combat... don't you?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Egres]

If that's a balance problem, then the problem is with the maneuver, not the warblade. A crusader could do that as well.

True.

That's wht the main problem is the Warblade and the fact that he can use it once every two rounds, alternating with full attacks or another maneuver.

If you can beat easily a Warblade with this maneuver, I can't imagine what you are able to do agains Fighters in your campaign.

 

[Black_Swan]

I'm pretty sure that manuever only works against creatures who's alignment is one step away from your own. So it is limited there as well...

I see nothing wrong with it. High level casters can kill a creature with a save or die spell or spew out massive amounts of damage. What's wrong with a high level fighter healing himself every other round or so...

Besides sometimes healing yourself isn't the best option..espescially if you'd rather actually kill the thing you're fighting.

I'm working towards master of nine and think the entire book gives fighters the boost they need to compete with spellcasters.

It only works on an enemy right next to you who's of a different alignment..and you need to recover it after you use it, to get it again. In the mean time you're giving up a few rounds of full attack.

Compare that to a wizard who can teleport around the world, invisibly blast people to smitherines, or slay them with a single spell.

 

[Nifft]

That's wht the main problem is the Warblade and the fact that he can use it once every two rounds, alternating with full attacks

You can't alternate with maneuvers, just full attacks.

AND you must refrain from using a Boost during your full attack or switching your Stance, AND you must refrain from using a Counter in the time between your Righteous Vitality and your full attack.

Warblades are weakened by their recovery mechanism, because Swift action are awesome for martial adepts, and because they need to recover more frequently than Swordsages.

Cheers, -- N

PS: IMHO, the Crusader's recovery mechanism is the best in the game, because it's free.

 

[3d6]

A cleric could maintain a full attack/heal routine for about 10-12 rounds of combat. According to various polls I've seen around here, an average combat at high levels lasts about 3 rounds, and people fight about 3-4 times per day, for a total of 9-12 rounds of combat each day. Thus, a cleric could heal itself about as often as the warblade could, and also has access to abilities like mass heal and all the various cure spells. Compared to a cleric of the same level, I don't think the warblade's ability to use the heal spell at will under certain circumstances is all that problematic.