PDA

View Full Version : Practiced Initiator?



Toliudar
2009-11-24, 05:48 PM
Is there a ToB equivalent to Practiced Spellcaster or Practiced Manifester, something that raises initiator level besides character levels?

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-24, 06:06 PM
Is there a ToB equivalent to Practiced Spellcaster or Practiced Manifester, something that raises initiator level besides character levels?Levels of non-manifesting classes add .5 to ML.

The_Snark
2009-11-24, 06:37 PM
Nope. Unlike caster levels, initiator levels can be used to qualify for higher levels of maneuvers. I think Wizards probably would have wanted to avoid that.

Plus, to my knowledge they never published any Tome of Battle-related stuff aside from the book itself.

Nero24200
2009-11-24, 06:45 PM
No such feat to my knowledge, but then again, it's not really needed. Unlike caster and manifester levels, taking levels in another class still gets your initiator levels.

Practised Caster/Manifeter is needed more since levels in non-casting/manifesting classes don't grant any additional casting/manifeting abilities

Darrin
2009-11-25, 12:27 AM
Plus, to my knowledge they never published any Tome of Battle-related stuff aside from the book itself.

Well, they did publish 4E...

A Practiced Initiator feat would be kinda wonky... you'd need at least 8 non-martial adept levels to get the benefit of +4 IL. I think the 0.5 IL for non-martial adept classes works just fine as-is.

Actually, you can use Bloodline levels (from UA) to crank up your IL, but the mechanics are a bit fugly, and its a bit too far over on the distasteful side of cheese that even the hardcore optimizers are leery of it.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-25, 01:02 AM
Well, they did publish 4E...Totally non-sequitur. ToB is interesting and useful. 4E is monotonous and rather dull. [/value judgment]

Optimystik
2009-11-25, 01:25 AM
Totally non-sequitur. ToB is interesting and useful. 4E is monotonous and rather dull. [/value judgment]

That must explain all the people not playing it and Wizards' subsequent bankruptcy :smallamused:

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-25, 01:47 AM
Yes, an absolute travesty. Coupled with the massive boycotts of M10 Wizards was ruined. Paizo is picking up a lot of the scraps, though.

BobVosh
2009-11-25, 01:50 AM
Yes, an absolute travesty. Coupled with the massive boycotts of M10 Wizards was ruined. Paizo is picking up a lot of the scraps, though.

M10 Wizards?


Totally non-sequitur. ToB is interesting and useful. 4E is monotonous and rather dull. [/value judgment]

[/agree]

jokey665
2009-11-25, 01:51 AM
M10 Wizards?

M10 = Magic '10, I would assume
Wizards = Wizards of the Coast

Drekk
2009-11-25, 11:38 AM
I agree that there should be some sort of "Practiced Initiator" feat. With the.5 IL measure, you're looking at 5th level maneuvers max and only with feat investiture for a 1/encounter ability and maybe a second for a stance that will be 1st level unless you wait till 11th level for a 3rd level stance, or 18th for a 5th level one. Getting ToB on a non-ToB char is expensive feat-wise, though admittedly all too easy with a dip of one or two levels...

Lapak
2009-11-25, 11:43 AM
I agree that there should be some sort of "Practiced Initiator" feat. With the.5 IL measure, you're looking at 5th level maneuvers max and only with feat investiture for a 1/encounter ability and maybe a second for a stance that will be 1st level unless you wait till 11th level for a 3rd level stance, or 18th for a 5th level one. Getting ToB on a non-ToB char is expensive feat-wise, though admittedly all too easy with a dip of one or two levels...Well, yeah. You're not going to be grabbing many spells without a few levels of dipping, either, and they're still going to be low-level. Practiced Spellcaster doesn't give you better spells; it just makes the ones you have a little more powerful. The proposed Practiced Initiator would be doing both, which is more of a boost than you should be able to get from a single feat. If you want high-level maneuvers, you need to invest levels in a martial class, just as you have to invest levels in a caster class to get high-level spells.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-25, 11:46 AM
I agree that there should be some sort of "Practiced Initiator" feat. With the.5 IL measure, you're looking at 5th level maneuvers max and only with feat investiture for a 1/encounter ability and maybe a second for a stance that will be 1st level unless you wait till 11th level for a 3rd level stance, or 18th for a 5th level one. Getting ToB on a non-ToB char is expensive feat-wise, though admittedly all too easy with a dip of one or two levels...

Yes. At level 18, you can get a 5th level ability of a class. At level 14, a 4th. At level 10, a 3rd.

Without a single class level.

Is it on par with Haste 1/encounter for a nonwizard?
Polymorph?

Unlike casting, which has "Practiced" feats, maneuvers aren't tied to class levels. They're tied to initiator level. So boosting IL has a powerful measurable impact on the maneuvers you get.

IMO, you should have to at least dip the class if you want the good stuff. You have to use dual progression to get multiple caster classes high.

With Swordsage? Wizard 18 / Swordsage 2.
Bam. 6th level maneuvers, and a lot of them.

Draken
2009-11-25, 11:50 AM
If anyone was truly intent on making such a feat, I believe it would work fairly better to base it off of Improved Binding (+2 to effective binder level) than off of Practiced Spellcaster/Manifester (+4 manifester/caster level, up to HD). Still quite a strong feat.

Sinfire Titan
2009-11-25, 05:01 PM
Yes, an absolute travesty. Coupled with the massive boycotts of M10 Wizards was ruined. Paizo is picking up a lot of the scraps, though.

Not the sarcasm! It burns!


That must explain all the people not playing it and Wizards' subsequent bankruptcy

Stagnation is one of the main complaints levied against 4E. Hopefully PH3 will shake things up a bit, but as it stands every class operates off of the same mechanics with a slight refluff. Some of us actually like learning entirely new subsystems and have a personal favorite subsystem that they would rather not see butchered into the same mechanics that the 4E PH1/2 have. Some of us think the 4E Psion preview is a step in the right direction for 4E Psionics. And everyone knows Lycan is a major Psionics fan, so if it lives up to the preview's hype then I think he would be sated with it.

But the fact remains that the 4E PH1 has 8 classes that all function off of identical rules; any differences are in targets affected, number of rolls needed, stats used, and the amount of damage/status effect imposed. If you ignore the numbers and actual effects of the abilities, what is the difference between a Warlord and a Cleric's power source? Not much other than fluff.

jokey665
2009-11-25, 05:07 PM
If you ignore the numbers and actual effects of the abilities, what is the difference between a Warlord and a Cleric's power source? Not much other than fluff.

I'm sorry, I have problems with 4e but I have more problems with this statement. You basically just said "If you ignore the crunch, what's left? Not much except fluff." I think that deserves a big DURRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Sinfire Titan
2009-11-26, 12:59 AM
I'm sorry, I have problems with 4e but I have more problems with this statement. You basically just said "If you ignore the crunch, what's left? Not much except fluff." I think that deserves a big DURRRRRRRRRRRRR.

I didn't say all of the crunch, just the different targets, rolls required, and damage/status effects.

When you get down to it, the PH1 is nothing but rolling d20s, adding your stat, and determining the action costs/results. It doesn't have differences between porew sources like 3.5 does. A vanican caster plays under different rules than an Artificer, meldshaper, or Psion. 4E doesn't hate that, at least prior to PH2.

sofawall
2009-11-26, 01:01 AM
I didn't say all of the crunch, just the different targets, rolls required, and damage/status effects.

When you get down to it, the PH1 is nothing but rolling d20s, adding your stat, and determining the action costs/results. It doesn't have differences between porew sources like 3.5 does. A vanican caster plays under different rules than an Artificer, meldshaper, or Psion. 4E doesn't hate that, at least prior to PH2.

3.5 didn't have that, at least prior to XPH.

Sinfire Titan
2009-11-26, 10:05 PM
3.5 didn't have that, at least prior to XPH.

Vanican Spellcasting VS Grapple rules, for starters.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-26, 10:07 PM
3.5 didn't have that, at least prior to XPH.Paladin, Fighter or Barbarian vs Wizard or Sorcerer. Far less similarity than between any 2 classes in the PHB 1 and 2.

Kelb_Panthera
2009-11-27, 01:23 AM
Hey everybody, let's not start another battle in the edition wars. As for the OP's question regarding a "practiced initiator" feat. No, no such feat exists. If you were to homebrew something to that effect, the suggestion made by draken doesn't sound too OP. Something along the line of:

Practiced Initiator

You are particularly adept in martial maneuvering.

Benefit: Your initiator level is increased by +2, as long as such an increase would not put your initiator level higher than your character level

Normal: Your initiator level is equal to your level in a martial adept class + 1/2 of your level in all other classes.

Special: You may take this feat more than once, each time you take it you must choose a different martial adept class to apply it to. If you have no levels in any martial adept classes you may only choose this feat once.