Warblade and Swordsage: Overpowered?

[Pielorinho]

Moderator's Notes:
I've only read a couple of posts in this thread, posts that were reported. I want to give folks a gentle reminder to address the argument, not the person making the argument; please do not speculate on the reason why folks make an argument, or describe their behavior in sarcastic, belittling, or mocking language.

Thanks!
Daniel

 

[sithramir]

Warblade is overpowered

Unfortunately I don't check the boards enough to read this entire 9 pages of comments. However, being as i'm in a campaign that has had a warblade or two in it now i'll give my say. I apologize that i'm sure it'sbeen all said before.

Warblades are sickingly overpowered. Here's the example:

We are 5th level now and I have a fighter and my friend has a warblade. His choices of powers allow him to make a concentration check for reflex or will saves so he has a PLUS 17 which is just insane. (He hasn't taken the fort save ability yet which he'll trade for reflex as it's not as crucial in some cases).

The fact that he gets d12 hps, weapon specialization, adaptive style, 4 skill points per level, tumble are irrelevant.

HE DOES 1d20 + 17 damage at 5th level with insightful strike! Double that on a crit! Did I mention he doesn't really need str to do this? His second round he uses mountain hammer and adds 2d6 to his attack damage. So he can't do these things EVERY round? He has to spend a free action to get his abilities back while attacking normally. Must hurt.

We're only 5th level but that's just wrong. The fact that he gets all the other abilities over a fighter is just sad.

He can only get better. At 11th level he gets to do 1d20+25-30 points of damage TIMES 2! Even 3 times if crit'd. Oh and at 12th level he gets ancient mountain hammer and can add 12d6 with a strike. He doesn't even need to do a full attack to out damage almost any fighter.

I just think it's sad I find myself trying to take a level or two of it with other classes because the benefits are so great. I can take one level of warblade using half the levels of other classes and still get an amazing will save or fort save and great damage bonus's.

Anyways, I think it's wrong that they make something like that when it's so obviously powerful. The only reason someone would take fighter now is for a few feats.

 

[Slaved]

How is he getting +17 to his concentration check?

+8 from skill points
+4 from constitution
+3 from skill focus

That is only +15 and it is likely making his other attacks weaker because of placing such a high stat in con along with having to spend that feat on concentration boosting.

Also, d20+17 averages out to 27.5. A fireball cast by a 5th level wizard with a certain feat does 5d6+5, which is a little less on average with only 22.5 but over a much larger area and at range.

 

[Nail]

I would make builds that use other levels, other point buys, other houserules, and other feat setups but it seems like a lot of work for no reward.

Much easier to say it is so, than to prove it. I understand.

What if we simplify the playing field? No house rules, 28 pt buy, feats in core rules plus Complete books plus PH II and ToB:Bo9S?

EDIT<

Spoiler

As I've said above, I used my house rules because I'm looking at how a WB affects my game....and those house rules are easily ignored, since they affect both classes equally.

>

The fighter needs more skill points, the fighter needs more skill choices, and he might even need more feats to do what he is supposed to do.

Here, I believe, is the core of the "Warblade is fine" argument. The Warblade is fine, because the Ftr (or Bbn, or Pal, or....) is weak. I'm not sure that's a persuasive argument.

 

[Nail]

Fundamentally, I don't think that gishes operate on a different paradigm. Most them operate simply as self buffing/supporting fighters since that's the only way to get enough synergy between the classes to make the combo worthwhile.

Agreed. I'm pleased (generally) about the direction the Duskblade is going, FWIW.

 

[sithramir]

The blade meditation feat gives him a +2 bonus on his class skill which for warblades happens to be concentration. That's where the other +2 comes from.

Yes. I agree a fireball is pretty powerful. But the point is that the warblade can do it several times in one combat and can then do it in every encounter. If we have several fights in one day which is typical for our group at least if we're in a specific adventure then he shines. A wizard may onle have 2-3 potential fireballs. Yes it's at range but you also can't use it if you're friends are nearby or if there are buildings nearby (assuming you actually care about the destruction of other people's property).

And so it's STILL more powerful because of that. While there are ways to deal more damage in some instances you'll be hard pressed to find a consisent way to do damage like the warblade can. The fact that he can hvae this output and outshine a paladin in saves (assuming he takes those maneuvers) is sick. Oh but he HAS to take those maneuvers? That's another benefit he has the OPTION to take other things.

You know my friend states how he feels its balanced because in our last campaign a warblade died. The funny thing is the reason he died was that he made his first fort save with his concenctration check (whatever maneuver gives that which I forget the name) and then had to make a second fort save and rolled a 1. He thinks since it's still possible the guy died it's ok. The funny thing is that another character might not have even had a chance with the first save yet alone two and this isn't including all the crazy benefits the class gets.

 

[Slaved]

Much easier to say it is so, than to prove it. I understand.

As that is what you have been doing I assumed that you would understand.

I say this because of what I've said before, you have taken one specific point on a rather large spectrum and made decissions about the rest of the spectrum. We all make guesses based on our experiences, I just don't think you have had enough data to make a firm call.

What if we simplify the playing field? No house rules, 28 pt buy, feats in core rules plus Complete books plus PH II and ToB:Bo9S?

Anyone up for this?

Here, I believe, is the core of the "Warblade is fine" argument. The Warblade is fine, because the Ftr (or Bbn, or Pal, or....) is weak. I'm not sure that's a persuasive argument.

Why not? The fighter has almost no skills and the ones he does have are not impressive. He has nearly no skill points and no reason to try to get more since his choice of skills are poor. This means that out of combat he is not worth much.

In combat he can be shown up by any of the other classes in the phb. Typically this means through specific builds while he can be a generalist but being a generalist is not all that rewarded. He is still king of his sandpile but without a very large selection of very good feats his sandpile is not very impressive.

Others look flashier, others have more options out of combat, others can even trump him in many areas.

In my experience the fighter is a weak class. Taking levels in it has come down to taking the hit in most every area simply to get a feat chain faster, which means no more than 2 levels of fighter ever and that is only if desperation forces it.

I have yet to see a persuasive arguement that the fighter is a well balanced class. In general it seems that for most builds one of the other classes would do it better or the same with more options. It does the best at feat chains but most feat chains are less effective than other class features. At least more books are seeing this now and making stronger high level feats. Perhaps it has changed and high level effects are good enough. That still doesnt make up for the fighters other lacks though.

 

[Slaved]

The blade meditation feat gives him a +2 bonus on his class skill which for warblades happens to be concentration. That's where the other +2 comes from.

Yes. I agree a fireball is pretty powerful. But the point is that the warblade can do it several times in one combat and can then do it in every encounter. If we have several fights in one day which is typical for our group at least if we're in a specific adventure then he shines. A wizard may onle have 2-3 potential fireballs. Yes it's at range but you also can't use it if you're friends are nearby or if there are buildings nearby (assuming you actually care about the destruction of other people's property).

True, the warblade can potentially do his more often. I gave the fireball example though to show that the damage was close to par, especially once you toss in the multiple feat cost to get there.

I think that with an 18 constitution that your friend would have had to put a smaller stat into strength than he would have done otherwise. To me this means that he sacrificed to hit and damage in order to get that bigger hit. Add in spending 2 feats to get there as well and the skill points and I am hard pressed to call it too many bad names.

Are those assumptions correct? Did he put a 14 into strength while he put the 18 into constitution? If so what if we look at other attacks and see how they would compare overall on average? Especially if we take one of those two feats and put it towards something else.

The fact that he can hvae this output and outshine a paladin in saves (assuming he takes those maneuvers) is sick.

The warblade at level 5 only has 4 manuevers readied. If he puts one aside to use concentration for a single will save, as an immediate action, this is definately very impressive but it also uses up a lot his option pool.

It outstripes the paladin for a single will save every other round at most.

If he also has the other manuever readied to get the boost to reflex saves then your friend is literally sitting at something like this:

Reflex save boost
Will save boost
Concentration strike
Something else

And that is all that he does for the battle.

It looks like he will use his concentration strike on the first round, regular attack on the second round recovering his manuever, and then strike on the third round. This routine only works though if he does not use his reflex or will save boost as those take immediate actions and recovering manuevers takes a swift action. So, using his save boost means that he disrupts his ability to use his concentration strike and his ability to get his save boost back.

The only reason someone would take fighter now is for a few feats.

Was there ever another reason to take a fighter than for the feats?

 

[Votan]

I have yet to see a persuasive arguement that the fighter is a well balanced class. In general it seems that for most builds one of the other classes would do it better or the same with more options. It does the best at feat chains but most feat chains are less effective than other class features. At least more books are seeing this now and making stronger high level feats. Perhaps it has changed and high level effects are good enough. That still doesnt make up for the fighters other lacks though.

The problem with the fighter is that, without skills, it can't fulfil the role of a scout or a sniper (or a really effective guard for that matter). It is hard to do the ounted warrior role in D&D givne the fragility of mounts (and the ability of the Paladin and Ranger to have better mounts as a class feature isn't helping any).

It has no rewards for lack of armor and every advantage for having heavy armor (unlike Barbarians and Scouts which have solid reasons not to be in full plate).

So the Fighter has three choices that I can see with-in the class:

a) Direct fire archery
b) Melee tank
c) Weapon master

and one out of class option:

d) fast qualificaiton for feat intensive prestige classes.

Let's ignore d).

a) is hard even in core. Add the spell compendium and the archery spells of the ranger are a real issue. It's a little better with the feats of a fighter to fast qualify for things like precise shot at very low levels. But, by level 3 or so, the ranger is doing fine.

Weapon specialization helps but only so much . . .


b) and c) are tough. The right extra books (PHB2; Complete Warrior gives the Paladin some great Divine Feats that more than make up for the extra feats that a Fighter can pick) makes a difference. But the truth is that a well built Paladin seems to tank slightly better and a cleric is no slouch in this department.

So really, the best role for a fighter is weapon master. He can learn exotic weapons (spiked chain) and dominate the battlefield. But it's a narrow edge, in my opinion.

[Also, deeply counterintuitive, is that a human is a suboptimal fighter race; pretty much the best choice seems to be a dwarf especially given the sad saving throws and the necessity of heavy armor]

So the warblade> fighter might be a mark of the fighter alone and not the warblade. If the warblade was better than the fighter, barbarian, paladin and ranger then I'd be more convinced.

 

[NilesB]

We are 5th... he gets... weapon specialization,

No he doesn't.

Complaining about the Warblade having abilities that it doesn't have isn't helping your case.