Tome of Battle: Bo9S classes in actual play?

[MerricB]

I must say, I'm having trouble seeing why Insightful Strike is broken. You make one attack, that does damage equal to your Concentration check, and you can't use any other modifiers - no Strength bonus, no special properties of the weapon (flaming, etc.), etc.

Cheers!

 

[NilesB]

The Swordsage was actually Lawful Neutral--there's a "Special" clause on Brand of the Nine Hells that says that devils may give the brand to favoured followers who are not Lawful Evil devils at the GM's discretion

No there is a Special clause in brand of the Nine Hells That allows it at DM's option to be taken by non-Devils if they are very very Lawful Evil, completely devoted to the service of that Archdevil, and absolutely not a PC.

he had to use up his recovery to get back his manoeuvres as a Swift action

I think you mean One maneuver.


It doesn't seem as if your anecdote tells us anything about how balanced the actual rules for martial adepts are.

 

[FireLance]

Swordsages can *never* get Warmaster's Charge, certainly. A swordsage must spend a feat to learn *one* White Raven Manuever or stance, and they can only ever take the feat (Martial Study) three times. It would take 5 feats to reach Warmaster's Charge.

Not exactly. A character can only take Martial Study three times, but there is no such limitation on Martial Stance, and stances also count towards fulfilling the maneuvers known prerequisite. A swordsage could theoretically take Martial Study twice, Martial Stance three times, and learn War Master's Charge with his 18th level feat. It's a lot of feats (6), but it's not impossible.

 

[Andor]

No there is a Special clause in brand of the Nine Hells That allows it at DM's option to be taken by non-Devils if they are very very Lawful Evil, completely devoted to the service of that Archdevil, and absolutely not a PC.

It doesn't seem as if your anecdote tells us anything about how balanced the actual rules for martial adepts are.

Yeah, I'd have to agree that a demo fight featuring what sounds like an utterly twinked PC built around a set of feats from another book that are meant to be NPC only, and played with what sounds like a possibly shakey grasp of the manuver recovery system, is probably not the best way to evaluate the balance of a class. It's kind of like firing a short sword out of a railgun and then claiming that destroying a concrete bunker should be average result of a sword swing.

 

[Nifft]

It's kind of like firing a short sword out of a railgun and then claiming that destroying a concrete bunker should be average result of a sword swing.

Right. Everyone knows that a short sword isn't a katana.

Cheers, -- N

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Recharge methods:

Crusader
The crusader readies a number of manuevers before battle. (From 5 to 7, depending on level, see table 1-1). When battle starts, he or she randomly chooses some of those (from 2 to 4, see table 1-1) to be available.

At the end of each round, the crusader has one more manuever become available to him or her, drawn randomly from those not yet chosen.

Which is why I'll never play one.

Warblade
The warblade begins with 3-7 manuevers readied before battle (see table 1-3), all available for use.

To recover their manuevers, the warblade can do one of two things:
* A swift action to recover, followed by a standard action that does nothing.

So why not call it a standard action? Or standard plus swift?

* A swift action to recover, followed by a melee attack.

Now this is also confusing. It sounds like you're basically losing a swift + move action.

You cannot use a manuever or change stance when recovering your manuevers.

To employ the second method, you may use any method that allows you to make a melee attack; so you could
* charge, take swift action to recover, make melee attack

Now this is getting overpowered. You can charge, which is a full-round action, get back your maneuvers, and all you've lost is a swift action.

* take swift action to recover, take full attack action (with several melee attacks)

As above.

* move, take swift action to recover, take standard attack action (with one melee attack)

Cheers!

Confusion abounds! Now it sounds like you basically only need to give up a swift action, at least as long as you get to make one or more attacks. This is really sounding overpowered.

I don't think you can use a maneuver in the same round when you recharge, but (especially with Weapon Specialization, Int-bonus to damage on some occasions, etc) a warblade's basic attacks match those of a fighter. The warblade loses nothing by recharging.

 

[Odhanan]

I really, really like Bo9S' Crusader. My next D&D character is going to be a Crusader with a nifty deity and original background to put icing on the cake, no question about it.

In actual play, the classes just fare well. Particularly well for the Warblade and Crusader if you just play hack'n'slash, without much tactical considerations, and just put "bags of HP" types of opponents in front of your PCs.

The swordsage is really, really special. It's a great fifth guy in a D&D group, but its role really depends on the kind of focus the player gives to the character. Without focus from the player's choices, the swordsage goes everywhere and sort of nowhere at the same time, if that makes sense to you.

 

[Seeten]

I also love the crusader. I love the Swordsage too. Heck, I even like the Warblade a lot.

 

[brehobit]

My experience with a short-lived game was that our 5th-level swordsage was hugely powerful. He did a heck of a job twinking it out and 5th level would appear to be a good level for any of the Bo9S characters. But still...

Also, if your characters are good at optimization you will see most, if not all, non-casters take at least one level of one of these at 9th level. Swordsage is probably the most optimal, but the other two are mighty nice (and full BAB).

The 9th level is so you have a initiator level of 5 (8 "other levels"/2 plus one real one) and so can get third level abilities (where the stances start getting good).

Mark

 

[MerricB]

So why not call it a standard action? Or standard plus swift?

Now this is getting overpowered. You can charge, which is a full-round action, get back your maneuvers, and all you've lost is a swift action.

Yep.

Mind you, how often can you charge in the middle of battle? Not often. It's not that great.

I don't think you can use a maneuver in the same round when you recharge, but (especially with Weapon Specialization, Int-bonus to damage on some occasions, etc) a warblade's basic attacks match those of a fighter. The warblade loses nothing by recharging.

The warblade certainly does! Fighters are better with their normal attacks than Warblades. Now, you need a PHB2 fighter, but that should be assumed.

Notes:
* Warblades have no proficiency with ranged weapons. None at all.
* Warblades do not have the bonus feats that Fighters do. The bonus feats that the warblade does get can only be described as weak. Nice, but weak.
* Warblades suffer badly from MAD.
* Warblades can't wear heavy armour. This means that at low levels, they are analogous to barbarians: high damage, low AC. (At high levels, mithral armour is the norm).
* Warblades get Weapon Spec at 6th level. So, at levels 4-5, Fighters deal more damage. At levels 6-7, they're almost on par for normal attacks (and it's a toss-up as to whether the warblade's manuevers are better than the fighter's iterative attacks). At level 8, Greater Weapon Focus and later feats give the Fighter the advantage.
* A human fighter at level 1 can have Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Cleave. That's a significant combination that keeps its usefulness throughout the fighter's life. That bonus feat is just useful; the ability to cleave really keeps them on par. (Sure, the human warblade can go PA/Cleave, but loses out on Weapon Focus...)

Cheers!