Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords: Proto-Review

[VirgilCaine]

And, as Vocenoctum was getting at, the idea that a longsword build warrior would suddenly forget how to use to longsword and instantly learn perfection with a greataxe is just terrible flavor. Using the rules to get around anti-fun DMing is a bad soution.

I think it's a good solution.

 

[kigmatzomat]

You need to look again.
Try Stone Dragon: +2d6 at 2nd level; +4d6 at 3rd; +6d6 at 5th
Tiger claw has some nice ones as well.

+2d6 is a nice adder for a 3rd level character who only gets one attack but the +4d6 comes at the cost of the 2nd attack at 6th+level and the +6d6 burns two iterative attacks. If you consider trading +7 damage/iterative attack to be overpowering, well, I don't think we use the same scale game. The fighter IMC at 6th level had a +7 damage/spec bonus, which unlike bonus dice is multiplied by criticals.

A full BAB warblade isn't going to have a problem hitting with their primary attack.

And you are discarding that the War Blade can take the same fighter feats. The fact that the fighter gets an extra +2 for greater specialization 2 levels sooner is not close to making up for +6d6 on primary attack every other round.

Let's see: the fighter can make 6 attacks (+16\11\6 x2) doing, say d8+8 each vs. the warblade making a +16 doing d8+8+6d6 and a +16 d8+8 when he refreshes the maneuver. So, trading 4 attacks at 11\6 for maybe 21 points of damage. If two of those attacks hit they will likely exceeds the bonus of the feat, neglecting any crits.

Wrong. He can re-ready all as a swift action with an attack. No slowing required.

I consider "slowing down" being "not making full attacks."

Except your sniper rifle converts into a shotgun or smg as a free action at will.

The fighter already has access to being the shotgun and SMG as well as more feats. The fighter is hard to discuss b/c the strength of the fighter is not being tied to a particular concept; fighters have flexibility. A fighter can be both power attack/greatcleave and Imp/TWF while anyone else is typically limited to one or the other. (side note: I hate the 3.5 fighter feats' stat requirements as it removes the fighter's flexibility)

Comparing the Barbarian (limited use Rage, improved movement, evasion, DR) to the Warblade (a few bonus feats, 1 or 2 stances, maneuvers) in my mind comes out reasonable.

The paladin (smite, turn, mount, spells, disease resistance, fear resistance, Cha to all saves but has Code) vs the crusader (smite, Cha to one save, counterstrike, ready supply of maneuvers) also does well.

Sword sage I need to read in more detail b/c I have not read the ability to create adept items in much detail yet so I'm not sure how useful that is. Sage should probably be compared to Warlock or Warmage, given the number of Maneuvers with saves.

 

[Victim]

Really, even the +100 damage moves didn't seem overpowered. A decent fighter at those levels can probably do alot more damage on a full attack. But the damaging manuevers greatly increase the initiator's manueverability - he can do some nasty stuff on a standard action, and many of the full round moves offer movement too - since he's not locked into requiring full attacks. Also, the damage versus AC curve is much smoother for manuevers. Because extra attacks come in at lower and lower bonuses, a fighter loses tons of damage as AC increases - even more so with a two weapon guy. The 20th level fighter barbarian might do 250+ unbuffed versus AC 35, but only say 50 versus AC 50. Having one big attack, like mounted combat, makes damage vary far less with AC.

 

[Lackhand]

I consider "slowing down" being "not making full attacks."

They actually still can make full attacks, though :-D

 

[Vocenoctum]

Sword sage I need to read in more detail b/c I have not read the ability to create adept items in much detail yet so I'm not sure how useful that is. Sage should probably be compared to Warlock or Warmage, given the number of Maneuvers with saves.

I think the sword sage is more of a monk with different powers. Their powers do more but reset less. Mind you, I'd take a swordsage over a monk any day of the week.

 

[kigmatzomat]

They actually still can make full attacks, though :-D

Umm, no, no they can't. While refreshing the warblade can only make a single attack. If you read the full text it takes a swift action PLUS the warblade is limited to only making a single attack OR making a non-combat flourish gesture. I'm not 100% sure they can take more than a 5' move.

And IIRC the text on virtually all the strikes restricts the Martial Adept to making a single attack as well, though Boosts allow full attack actions. Counters are, of course, Immediate actions and happen outside the normal action chain.

 

[BryonD]

+2d6 is a nice adder for a 3rd level character who only gets one attack but the +4d6 comes at the cost of the 2nd attack at 6th+level and the +6d6 burns two iterative attacks. If you consider trading +7 damage/iterative attack to be overpowering, well, I don't think we use the same scale game. The fighter IMC at 6th level had a +7 damage/spec bonus, which unlike bonus dice is multiplied by criticals.

But again you neglect the main point I have repeatedly made.

The warblade can do the same iterative attacks as the fighter if he wishes OR add the bonus damage to the main attack. Because the war blade can select which option to use on a case by case basis he has a giant advantage.

A War blade 6 would easily have the EXACT same +7 bonus to damage. And can choose to take the second attack at -5 OR roll another +4d6 on top of the +7.
Also, a crit with a longsword will do 5.5+7 extra damage for +12.5 less than 10% of the time. Or you can just tack on an extra +14 avg with a normal hit.
An Axe crit is better, but only half as common, so the math still favors the warblade. Greatly. All that ON TOP of the warblades option to ignore this ability and fight just like the fighter.
Big bonus, no downside.

Let's see: the fighter can make 6 attacks (+16\11\6 x2) doing, say d8+8 each vs. the warblade making a +16 doing d8+8+6d6 and a +16 d8+8 when he refreshes the maneuver. So, trading 4 attacks at 11\6 for maybe 21 points of damage. If two of those attacks hit they will likely exceeds the bonus of the feat, neglecting any crits.

The math on the crits is already shot down above.
Even more significant, the fact that, if tactically favorable the warblade can do exactly as well as the fighter is also pointed out above.
You are giving the fighter credit for abilities that the warblade shares.

I consider "slowing down" being "not making full attacks."

The warblade will have 4 to 6 manuevers, dependign on level.
So he only has to "slow down" every 5th or 7th round.
How often do fighters get to make full attacks on seven consecutive rounds?
And THAT assumes that the war blade never has to settle for being just a fighter for a round and make a normal, no maneuver full attack. Not exactly a good assumption. And if he DOES run out of manuevers he can still continue to full attack as long as he wants. There is zero obligation to EVER slow down. He will only do so when it is tactically sound.
Which is real likely to come up very soon.
As soon as you need to move you simply move, reactivate with a swift action and then either make your attack or burn your standard action ii there is nothing to attack. The tactical cost of this is near to zero.

The fighter already has access to being the shotgun and SMG as well as more feats.

Agreed.

The warblade has access to being the shot gun and the smg AND the sniper rifle. And gets more HP and more SP in addition to a both stances and maneuvers. (We have not even touched on stances yet) You claim the feat make up for all this. but I've yet to see an example that actually shows it.

The fighter is hard to discuss b/c the strength of the fighter is not being tied to a particular concept; fighters have flexibility. A fighter can be both power attack/greatcleave and Imp/TWF while anyone else is typically limited to one or the other.

Agreed. But the war blade will outshine him.

Comparing the Barbarian (limited use Rage, improved movement, evasion, DR) to the Warblade (a few bonus feats, 1 or 2 stances, maneuvers) in my mind comes out reasonable.

show it

The paladin (smite, turn, mount, spells, disease resistance, fear resistance, Cha to all saves but has Code) vs the crusader (smite, Cha to one save, counterstrike, ready supply of maneuvers) also does well.

show it

Sword sage I need to read in more detail b/c I have not read the ability to create adept items in much detail yet so I'm not sure how useful that is. Sage should probably be compared to Warlock or Warmage, given the number of Maneuvers with saves.

So far I think I like the sword sage.

 

[BryonD]

Umm, no, no they can't. While refreshing the warblade can only make a single attack. If you read the full text it takes a swift action PLUS the warblade is limited to only making a single attack OR making a non-combat flourish gesture. I'm not 100% sure they can take more than a 5' move.

You are only part right.
It doesn't say anything about being forced to start your turn with the swift action.
It only says you must attack or burn a standard right after the swift.
There is nothing to prevent move - swift - standard.

 

[Vocenoctum]

But again you neglect the main point I have repeatedly made.

The warblade can do the same iterative attacks as the fighter if he wishes OR add the bonus damage to the main attack. Because the war blade can select which option to use on a case by case basis he has a giant advantage.

The paladin and barbarian can also do the same thing, plus other abilities. So basically the problem is with the fighter, rather than the warblade?

At 6th level, the fighter will have 4 Fighter Bonus Feats, the Warblade will have 1 Warblade Bonus Feat + the manuevers. The fighter can use a full attack at the same time as his feats, the Warblade often can not.

Either way, it's another repetitive ENWorld arguement. There's no way to "show" balance between two seperate classes, so it's pointless to debate too far along the same paths.

 

[BryonD]

The paladin and barbarian can also do the same thing, plus other abilities. So basically the problem is with the fighter, rather than the warblade?

It is pretty well established and (I believe) accepted that the barbarian is fairly matched with the fighter. The paladin is a more complicated case with so many outside combat abilities, but I think the same general conclusion holds.

But all that aside, I have never seen anyone try to show that the barbarian is equal to the fighter by forcing the barbarian to give up interative attacks when the barbarian is in no way obligated to.
This was the cornerstone element of kigmatzomat's argument. So it isn't to do with any of the classes. It is a flaw in the arguement.

At 6th level, the fighter will have 4 Fighter Bonus Feats, the Warblade will have 1 Warblade Bonus Feat + the manuevers. The fighter can use a full attack at the same time as his feats, the Warblade often can not.

Correction:
At 6th level, the fighter will have 4 Fighter Bonus Feats + heavy armor prof + more ranged weapons, the Warblade will have 1 Warblade Bonus Feat + the manuevers + stances + uncanny dodge + improved uncanny dodge + battle clarity + weapon aptitude + battle ardor + more HP + more SP.

From there the fighter gets a feat every other level and the warblade gets a feat or a special ability pretty much every other level (they each get seven more "specials" between 7th and 20th). PLUS the warblade gets better and better manuevers and stances and continues to get more hp and sp.

Either way, it's another repetitive ENWorld arguement. There's no way to "show" balance between two seperate classes, so it's pointless to debate too far along the same paths.

It is possible to show that one class is clearly more powerful than another.
I think that has been done and the counter examples have been significantly flawed. (frex: forcing the war blade to make sub optimal tacitcal choices)

What do you say to gribble's comments above?