Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arkhandus" data-source="post: 3540562" data-attributes="member: 13966">Meaning they don't suck compared to 2/3rds or so of all D&D classes, who are primary casters and therefore have access to awesome-powerful spells over time?  Core spellcasters are better than core warrior-types after a few levels.  More powerful and more versatile, and more fun through those abilities.Now, as we've already clearly pointed out in this thread or another so far, a core Barbarian can outdamage a martial adept class pretty consistently, just not with a single hit (which is no big deal; most of the time the Barbarian is going to be making full-attack actions anyway).  Ergo, the martial adept classes are not necessarily overpowered compared to core warrior classes.And again, I refer you to the thread in General, where we already pointed out that while a few maneuvers may be broken, that does not make martial adepts broken in general, and it is no worse than the handful of broken spells already available to casters in the core rules.Sure.  He's a monk.  He's already going to succeed at most Will saves, what do you expect?  High base Will, high Wisdom, Still Mind class feature, and eventually gains very decent Spell Resistance (though your multiclassed one may or may not go that far in monk).  Now he just has the ability to nearly ensure that he'll succeed at a Will save, once every 2 rounds at most, and that's if he spends a round doing absolutely nothing useful to recover the maneuver or ready maneuvers again through the Adaptive Style feat.It's still only once per 2 rounds, you know, and using it prevents the martial adept from using another save-boosting maneuver for 1 round.  Just means the enemy has to throw 2 or 3 save effects at him in one round, or 1 such effect on 2 rounds in a row, or whatever.  Is it really so wrong to have more than one enemy spellcaster in an encounter?  And it's not like you wouldn't already have to account for the party's abilities when planning encounters, if they had a spellcaster around instead of a martial adept.  And again, besides, the martial adept won't be able to use these maneuvers again until he spends a round doing nothing useful to get them back (or just to get 1 back, if he's a swordsage who didn't take Adaptive Style).(Quick Edit: Forgot to address the Insightful Strike.  That too is only once per 2 rounds at best, and even if he uses other strikes for a few rounds, he still has to stop after a few moments and spend a round or more to regain the use of his maneuvers.)Is that really any different from a Wizard who casts Detect Magic and detects the illusion aura in the room, then gets a new chance to disbelieve with an added bonus or something for having received evidence that there's something fishy?  C'mon!And that's assuming he doesn't just use an area Dispel Magic or something.  Or that the party's monk or cleric didn't somehow, by rights, succeed at their saving throw because of their already-great Will saves.</blockquote>

Verification