Tome of Battle - spells for fighters? How does that work?

[Klaus]

"Spell like" in that they're limited use and have names.

Not "spell like" in that they're all magical and sparkly.

It's a great system, although easy to misunderstand if you've never seen it and are going on out of context quotes.

Cheers, -- N

Although SOME are magical and sparkly (like creating a "fireball" with Desert Wind maneuvers).

Some are more straightforward, though. A 9th-level maneuver (i.e., on par with Meteor Swarm) allows an initiator (read: caster) to deal +100 damage with his attack.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I think when it was about to come out, or when it just had, or something, I proclaimed that it sounded a good deal like Mike Mearls (formerly at Malhavoc Press, then and now at WotC) had ported the Ritual Warrior from Arcana Unearthed (or Arcana Evolved) - a book from Malhavoc Press - to D&D 3e.


edit --- Hrm, or I might've put it a bit more like this.

Um, but yeah, the gist is there.

Mind you, not to mention a bit of Iron Heroes creeping in there, either. Oops, did I?

In all seriousness though, it's quite a bit like wuxia brought to D&D. Though some parts can represent a good many other things, I'm told.

 

[jasin]

Why does a fighter need spell-like powers to do that? Sucks to be the non-fighters in melee if this is the case.

That would be a nice change from sucking to be the fighter in melee, wouldn't it?

OK, fighters are not that bad in 3E. Yesterday, our fighter killed a CR 17 unique fiend (

Spoiler

the Ebon Aspect in Alhaster in Age of Worms

) in a single round with two ~150 hp criticals. But one of the notorious problems of 3E has been the cleric being a better melee warrior than the fighter.

As much as I liked playing a melee cleric, I wouldn't mind changes that would make the fighter the top melee guy again.

 

[Dragonblade]

I love the Tome of Battle. It is for me the single best 3rd Edition game product I have ever purchased outside the core rulebooks. If this is a preview for 4e then I'm sold!!

 

[Wormwood]

In all seriousness though, it's quite a bit like wuxia brought to D&D. Though some parts can represent a good many other things, I'm told.

Using the Bo9S, I am able to make more interesting and effective Barbarians, Duelists and Knights that I could using the eponymous base classes---without a whiff of Wuxia.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Using the Bo9S, I am able to make more interesting and effective Barbarians, Duelists and Knights that I could using the eponymous base classes---without a whiff of Wuxia.

Good to hear!

I've been meaning to give the thing a closer look one of these days. It's comments like these from people I've seen previously posting coherent thoughts, that nudge me a little closer each time.

And well, I'm not too surprised to hear that "duelists" (in particular) and "knights" are built with greater ease than when using core only. . .,or several other alternatives even, perhaps.

But the "barbarian". . . how does that one work out, all ToBed?

 

[WhatGravitas]

In all seriousness though, it's quite a bit like wuxia brought to D&D. Though some parts can represent a good many other things, I'm told.

Yep. If you cut some over-the-top-stuff, and make it more mundane (i.e. ban the non-mundane stuff), you get back a solid system to give fighters in melee more to do than "I attack and roll...".

If they used the system (i.e. mechanics) and whacked it with the Anti-Cheese-Hammer(TM) on the flavour, they may get a great system for something like 4E!

@Agamon: After re-reading my own posts, I've realized, that I've channeled a bit too much snark into it, more than intended - sorry, if I offended you - I know that the first impression of Bo9S can easily be a bad one.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Nifft]

Although SOME are magical and sparkly

Yes. You can be Wuxia or Ninja if you want, or you can be Conan.

It's all there.

Cheers, -- N

 

[I'm A Banana]

I have some issues with the Bo9S, mostly with regards to balance (the Warblade owns all!) and mechanics (Random shuffling powers are not very cool!), but the core idea is good enough to take it into a very interesting 4e. Balance won't be an issue if everything is built on that, and I hope they've learned their lesson with the Crusader.

 

[jasin]

And well, I'm not too surprised to hear that "duelists" (in particular) and "knights" are built with greater ease than when using core only. . .

To be fair, I'm not sure "ease" would be the word I'd use. Bo9S has a certain amount of extra fiddliness compared to the core melee classes... You know how it's common wisdom that spellcasters aren't good classes for newbies? I'd definitely extend that to Bo9S classes.

But the "barbarian". . . how does that one work out, all ToBed?

There's a discipline (one of the 9, as in Bo9S) called Tiger Claw that's all about jumping, fighting with two weapons, and being a screaming bloodthirsty maniac. Powers include jumping as a swift action, making bucketloads of attacks, scent, intimidating enemies by killing one of them, making attacks with hefty bonuses to attack and damage and hefty penalties to AC, and the already mentioned "I hit you with my sword, save or DIE!!1".

So you could either make a berserker by making a warblade focusing on that school, or just spice up a barbarian by using feats to pick up a couple of maneuvers you particularly like.