Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords: Proto-Review
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gribble" data-source="post: 3014697" data-attributes="member: 12430"><p>Wrong. There is the <em>attack action</em> which is a standard action and allows you to make one melee attack or one ranged attack. There is also the <em>full attack action</em>, which is a full round action and allows you to make multiple melee attacks or multiple ranged attacks (if BAB or other factors - TWF, etc allow). As currently worded, it would be perfectly legal to take a swift action to replenish your maneuvers, followed by a full attack action. This would meet the prerequisite of making a melee attack immediately after the swift action - the wording specifically doesn't say that you must take the <em>attack action</em>, or that the melee attack you must make can't be followed by further melee attacks. This is either an oversight or intentional on the part of WotC. If the former, it will soon be errated as (IMO) it just makes the warblade too good. With the limitation of having to follow the swift action with only a single melee attack (i.e.: the standard action <em>attack action</em>) the warblade is still a very good, but probably not broken, class. In fact, this is something I'll probably houserule, if anyone wants to play one in a game I run.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Wrong again. Being based on a fighter, the DD had more feats than the warblade, and certainly wasn't based purely around defence (though one of the few advantages he had over the warblade was a higher AC - not that it really mattered against a CRD, which was pretty much hitting on 1s anyway). While he certainly seemed to suck compared to the druid, cleric, wizard and warblade, he was definitely better than the rogue, and I think he was about what I'd expect from a 20th level warrior type in terms of power scale. He just didn't stack up to the warblade, which as the other fighter-type is the best thing to compare him to. Even the DM (who presumably had seen the warblade in action all day) said that the class was broken.</p><p></p><p>Oh, and sorry about not getting the stats up. I haven't been home the last couple of evenings, but I'll make sure I get it done tonight or over the weekend.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gribble, post: 3014697, member: 12430"] Wrong. There is the [I]attack action[/I] which is a standard action and allows you to make one melee attack or one ranged attack. There is also the [I]full attack action[/I], which is a full round action and allows you to make multiple melee attacks or multiple ranged attacks (if BAB or other factors - TWF, etc allow). As currently worded, it would be perfectly legal to take a swift action to replenish your maneuvers, followed by a full attack action. This would meet the prerequisite of making a melee attack immediately after the swift action - the wording specifically doesn't say that you must take the [I]attack action[/I], or that the melee attack you must make can't be followed by further melee attacks. This is either an oversight or intentional on the part of WotC. If the former, it will soon be errated as (IMO) it just makes the warblade too good. With the limitation of having to follow the swift action with only a single melee attack (i.e.: the standard action [I]attack action[/I]) the warblade is still a very good, but probably not broken, class. In fact, this is something I'll probably houserule, if anyone wants to play one in a game I run. Wrong again. Being based on a fighter, the DD had more feats than the warblade, and certainly wasn't based purely around defence (though one of the few advantages he had over the warblade was a higher AC - not that it really mattered against a CRD, which was pretty much hitting on 1s anyway). While he certainly seemed to suck compared to the druid, cleric, wizard and warblade, he was definitely better than the rogue, and I think he was about what I'd expect from a 20th level warrior type in terms of power scale. He just didn't stack up to the warblade, which as the other fighter-type is the best thing to compare him to. Even the DM (who presumably had seen the warblade in action all day) said that the class was broken. Oh, and sorry about not getting the stats up. I haven't been home the last couple of evenings, but I'll make sure I get it done tonight or over the weekend. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords: Proto-Review
Top