What is it with Sage Advice & Tome of Battle?

[Seeten]

Lots of stuff

I just wanted to say while I agree with your "Every game is different" thesis, I disagree with pretty much every single other thing you said.

 

[blargney the second]

I have a player using the Warblade class. So far my experience has been that the WB is a significant "power-up" from the fighter....

Dude, the commoner is almost a power-up from the fighter.

Anyways, if you want a more meaningful comparison, the warblade has much more in common with the barbarian than the fighter.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Dude, the commoner is almost a power-up from the fighter.

I realize this is exageration - and I'm not claiming that the fighter in a core-only game is the most powerful character - but I still believe that feat-every-other-level is not chump change.

Personally, I'd rather deal with dealing with the "overpoweredness" of arcanists/clerics/druids rather than add a book that brings fighters up to their level. a high level wizard is crazy powerful ... to powerful for my taste. But of course, that is just my opinion. Others are welcome to flavor their game differently.

In regard to the amount of questions, however ...

I suspect that the answer lies in two things that have already been said: Power Creep and relative newness of the books.

I think I remember a thread here a few months ago that explained that WotC primary income comes within 1-4 months after the release date of a book. After that point there are still sales, but they have decreased dramatically. That implies that people are (surprise surprise! ) buying the books reasonably close to when they are released. So, I would expect the questions to come during that time as well.

However, I think there is a good bit of truth in the power creep answer as well. [And I'm with Nail on this one. Every thread I've seen on ToB:Bo9S ultimately comes down to "yeah, well, the fighter needed an upgrade to compete with arcanists anyway." That is power creep.] Chances are that when a new product comes out and there is a question that arises - but none of the possible readings are broken - the gamers are likely to say "We'll choose ____ reading and we're okay with that." But when reading a new rule where a question comes up and one or more of the possible readings provide something that seems quite powerful - the gamers (or more likely the DM) are going to get an official ruling. That way, they can make sure that they accept or reject a powerful ruling knowing designer's inent (or as close to that as the Sage can get, I suppose).

 

[Tzeentch]

Even as a featmonkey fighters are a bit blah, as the most powerful Feats are, you guessed it, caster feats (Divine Metamagic anyone?).

Bo9S classes pretty much replace the core martial classes. Arguably this was the wrong way of doing things (buffing martial instead of nerfing casters) but it did satisfy a need with many players - which is why it tends to be a well regarded book by many (I don't presume to say "most" or "all" but it is a popular sourcebook).

As for why so much Sage Advice, it was the books turn in the limelight and as a heavy rules book with a lot of interest it's bound to generate lots and lots of questions. Take a look at the massively long list of questions people have posed about something as relatively simple as the warlock class for example

 

[Piratecat]

Would you claim, then, that the ToB:Bo9S is NOT more powerful than what came before?

Golly, no. That would be the Tome of Magic! Three over-powered classes right there!

Look, people discuss power creep as if it is consistent and inevitable. I personally believe that all rules supplements have a power curve that's somewhere on a continuum either below or above the core rules. ToB's a little higher, ToM's a lot lower, and between the two of them I think ToM is a larger problem.

 

[AllisterH]

Golly, no. That would be the Tome of Magic! Three over-powered classes right there!

Look, people discuss power creep as if it is consistent and inevitable. I personally believe that all rules supplements have a power curve that's somewhere on a continuum either below or above the core rules. ToB's a little higher, ToM's a lot lower, and between the two of them I think ToM is a larger problem.

That's what I'm somewhat frustrated about. People are quick to shout power creep but then they conveniently ignore things like ToM which is a definite power down compared to the core rules (the Truename mechanic becomes harder and harder to use as you level up, the mysteries of Shadowcraft come nowhere close to the power of spells etc...)

 

[Technik4]

People are quick to shout power creep but then they conveniently ignore things like ToM which is a definite power down compared to the core rules (the Truename mechanic becomes harder and harder to use as you level up, the mysteries of Shadowcraft come nowhere close to the power of spells etc...)

It's quite simple. People buy and use stuff that is above the established power level (ie- books that power creep). People may buy the stuff that is below the established level, but it doesn't get used much. So really, who cares?

If you are talking about game balance, the expansion that invalidates some of the core elements is a much bigger problem than the expansion that offers options that come up a little short, from a gaming point of view. From a sales point of view, well that's a different story.

 

[hong]

Whether your group restricts clerics is irrelevant. The rules are there (implied instead of written in large bold letters with 'Prerequisite' and 'Normal' afterwards).

The rules as they are applied take precedence over the rules as they are written which take precedence over the rules as they are implied. And the rules as they are applied say that, in the great majority of cases, paladins are the ones who provoke the most angst.

The Warlock is situationally stronger than any magical class printed before it. That is an example of power creep. Personally, I don't have a huge problem playing with the class, but it is a very good example of how things are creeping up in power. In earlier editions arcane casters had 1 spell and some cantrips at 1st level and progressed slowly.

Your flip from comparisons within an edition to comparisons between editions is noted.

These days you can play a low-level warlock and zap things until you pass out from exhaustion.

You say this like it's a positive thing.

 

[AllisterH]

It's quite simple. People buy and use stuff that is above the established power level (ie- books that power creep). People may buy the stuff that is below the established level, but it doesn't get used much. So really, who cares?

If you are talking about game balance, the expansion that invalidates some of the core elements is a much bigger problem than the expansion that offers options that come up a little short, from a gaming point of view. From a sales point of view, well that's a different story.

So let me get this straight.

Even though the new magic options released over the years (Tome of Magic, the new spontaneous casters, the new druid variant in PHB II & the polymorph subschool) have been weaker than core spellcasting, this all gets ignored yet since ToB is power creep, this proves that there has been power creep in the system?

Nevermind that you have not proven that the ORIGINAL core system itself is balanced?

:\

 

[Technik4]

Your flip from comparisons within an edition to comparisons between editions is noted.

Its just more of an example of power creep in the game. More power, at earlier levels = power creep. I'm not denouncing the trend, just calling a cat a cat. If you have fun playing a swordsage and dealing 100s of points of damage, and your group is cool with it, more power to you (literally). But lets not argue whether you could do the same thing with a Fighter.