Tome of Battle - spells for fighters? How does that work?
- Thread starter Tonguez
- Start date
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
There are a bunch of things that are just awesome about blade magic:
1) You usually only make one attack, so it speeds up combat.
2) The effects are easy to apply, so it speeds up combat.
3) It's just plain fun and oozes style.
I'll give you an example. There's an attack called White Raven Strike. As a standard action, you make a single attack. If you hit, you deal an extra 4d6 damage and your target is flat-footed until their next action. The concept is really basic: you whack your enemy so hard that he's reeling for a couple of seconds and your allies can take advantage of it. It's a 3rd level maneuver, so you must have initiator level 5 or higher to learn it.
1) You usually only make one attack, so it speeds up combat.
2) The effects are easy to apply, so it speeds up combat.
3) It's just plain fun and oozes style.
I'll give you an example. There's an attack called White Raven Strike. As a standard action, you make a single attack. If you hit, you deal an extra 4d6 damage and your target is flat-footed until their next action. The concept is really basic: you whack your enemy so hard that he's reeling for a couple of seconds and your allies can take advantage of it. It's a 3rd level maneuver, so you must have initiator level 5 or higher to learn it.
Agamon
Adventurer
Nifft said:"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.
Whoa, I was talking about 4E, which is what I thought you were talking about here (Wow, Nifft has played it!) LOL
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
I've got to tell you, the warblade really isn't all that. It looks fearsome on paper and that gets touted a lot on the internet, but when you actually put it in play it's totally fine. The crusader is overall a stronger class when you sit down and start chucking the dice. I quite enjoy the random inspiration that shuffling crusader maneuvers allows, but I would never use one on the DMing side of the screen.Kamikaze Midget said: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.
I totally agree that Bo9S combat would make a fantastic core mechanic for 4E.
-blarg
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
It's more Fighter than the Fighter (and more Barbarian than the Barbarian!)
Kind of like how the Warforged is more Dwarf than the Dwarf.
This isn't necessarily a problem: it's not going to break the game. But it does break the Fighter. And the Barbarian. If those had problems to begin with, that's not a bad thing, but if they didn't (I'm of that opinion), then making something better is unbalancing.
Random powers are stickier. The Truenamer is problematic because his powers might not go off. Ditto with the 2e Psionicist. The Crusader is problematic because he might not have the right power at the moment.
"Give me a second, guys, I'm going to go over here and wail on this tree for a minute until I get a suite of powers I like."
But more to the point of the thread, I loved the concepts behind Bo9S, and I think it will make a very solid Fighter design for 3e. I've got no problem with them replacing the Fighter right out of the gate, so to speak.
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
*nod* Troo, dat.Nifft said:There are other threads to discuss this particular topic, so let me just say that your opinion is not universal.
Just out of curiosity... Kamikaze Midget, have you actually played a warblade or crusader yet? And remember, this is for posterity so be honest.
Similar Threads
