PDA

View Full Version : which book is unarmed swordsage from? is there a better database then crystal keep?



taltamir
2010-01-12, 01:42 AM
I keep on running into things that are not listed in the crystal keep index.
For example, unarmed swordsage... what book is it from?

arguskos
2010-01-12, 01:44 AM
Tome of Battle, it's a variant of the standard Swordsage.

taltamir
2010-01-12, 02:26 AM
thank you. very interesting read

Serenity
2010-01-12, 03:29 AM
It's not even an 'official' variant, to be strictly accurate; like it's brethren, the Arcane Swordsage, it's a suggested tweak to adapt the Swordsage to different flavor, so you're free to add or subtract features in addition to what's lifted to fit your particular circumstances.

lord_khaine
2010-01-12, 03:41 AM
But generaly you would be better off just spending 2 feats on superior unarmed damage, at least you would still be able to use light armor thne.

hiryuu
2010-01-12, 03:44 AM
But generaly you would be better off just spending 2 feats on superior unarmed damage, at least you would still be able to use light armor thne.

Or you could spend one feat on light armor, or wear light armor that has no armor check penalty.

JaronK
2010-01-12, 03:59 AM
But generaly you would be better off just spending 2 feats on superior unarmed damage, at least you would still be able to use light armor thne.

No way. Take the Unarmed Swordsage level, and dip something else for two levels. For pretty much any Swordsage build, there's something tasty you can get in those levels, and you only lose one initiator level.

JaronK

Lycanthromancer
2010-01-12, 09:56 AM
I'm currently building a level 10 warforged psion//artificer, and I'm finding that a single level-dip in unarmed swordsage (on the psionics side) goes deliciously well with everything else he has, including dimension door more or less at will.

...especially since he's already dumped an entire level's worth of XP on crafting and went from 66,000 gp to more than 200,000 gp, including a psychoactive skin of proteus. Who needs weapons and armor when you've already got both welded onto your body?

Optimystik
2010-01-12, 10:34 AM
@ Lycan, why Swordsage instead of Warblade? Warforged have a wis penalty, but it sounds like your gestalt relies on INT, and a 1-level dip gives you INT to reflex saves.

Lycanthromancer
2010-01-12, 10:39 AM
@ Lycan, why Swordsage instead of Warblade? Warforged have a wis penalty, but it sounds like your gestalt relies on INT, and a 1-level dip gives you INT to reflex saves.Because my character will be a lone mercenary that infiltrates armies behind enemy lines, and shadow hand is his primary discipline.

...Also, the child of shadows stance saves me 24,000 gp in the form of a cloak of minor displacement. :smalltongue:

[edit] And I'm taking a 1 level dip, not 2, meaning my Wisdom issues are null.

Oslecamo
2010-01-12, 11:04 AM
I must point out that the shaddow jaunt maneuvers demand line of sight and effect, making them worse than the actual dimension door spell.


Also I find it quite funny that the unarmed swordsage almost has choirs singed in it's name from the fans of ToB, but every time someone points the arcane swordsage, they just mumble "It's just a homebrew sugestion, not really valid for anything".

Doc Roc
2010-01-12, 11:08 AM
So, yeah.

I'm going to come out and say this:

Arcane swordsage is obviously bad.
Unarmed swordsage is obviously good.

God in heaven help you if you can't come to this conclusion yourself with just a bit of examination.
For example:
Do you recover spells when you recover maneuvers?
What's your caster level as an arcane swordsage?
How many levels can you miss and get ninths?

That said, no one in their right mind calls either of them homebrew. We just curl up, and stare at the ceiling. It's just like how no one really talks seriously about spell-to-power erudite.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-01-12, 11:09 AM
Swapping one feature for another is a lot less significant than swapping maneuvers (the primary class feature) for spells (whose quantity and refresh time are unmentioned)

d13
2010-01-12, 11:09 AM
Also I find it quite funny that the unarmed swordsage almost has choirs singed in it's name from the fans of ToB, but every time someone points the arcane swordsage, they just mumble "It's just a homebrew sugestion, not really valid for anything".

It's pretty much the same as:

"Melee can't get nice things, this is total bs! But no, you're not allowed to use the Tome of Battle. It's overpowered"


Unrelated ninjas, but ninjas nonetheless...

Doc Roc
2010-01-12, 11:11 AM
It's pretty much the same as:

"Melee can't get nice things, this is total bs! But no, you're not allowed to use the Tome of Battle. It's overpowered"


Okay, seriously?
Arcane Swordsage is considerably more powerful than wizard.
There's no good parallel between these two examples.

Vortling
2010-01-12, 11:11 AM
Also I find it quite funny that the unarmed swordsage almost has choirs singed in it's name from the fans of ToB, but every time someone points the arcane swordsage, they just mumble "It's just a homebrew sugestion, not really valid for anything".

Who's mumbling? Every time I've heard it mentioned it's shouted from the rooftops that "arcane swordsage is broken if you let them take any spells they want from the sorcerer/wizard list". That's hardly mumbling, but instead a direct acknowledgment that it won't work unless you put more work into. Conversely, the unarmed swordsage variant works as is based off the book's suggestions.

lord_khaine
2010-01-12, 11:20 AM
Or you could spend one feat on light armor, or wear light armor that has no armor check penalty.


No way. Take the Unarmed Swordsage level, and dip something else for two levels. For pretty much any Swordsage build, there's something tasty you can get in those levels, and you only lose one initiator level.

JaronK

I think you are missing the main point, Swordsage can use light armor and still gain their Wisdom bonus to AC, unarmed swordsage cant do that, light armor proficiency would be a waste for them.


@ Lycan, why Swordsage instead of Warblade? Warforged have a wis penalty, but it sounds like your gestalt relies on INT, and a 1-level dip gives you INT to reflex saves.

I have seen a lot of people give that advice, but it seems they ignore that the Int bonus to ref save is limited by your warblade level.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-01-12, 11:21 AM
I have seen a lot of people give that advice, but it seems they ignore that the Int bonus to ref save is limited by your warblade level.

Forget, not ignore. Humans forget rules, munchkins ignore them.

Oslecamo
2010-01-12, 11:25 AM
"Melee can't get nice things, this is total bs! But no, you're not allowed to use the Tome of Battle. It's overpowered"


Actualy, more like "Tome of Battle has huge glaring holes on it, just like any other splatbook."

This is, ToB is a great book-Once you cut some stuff, fill holes and then keep an eye open for any issues that may have slipped.

Like many already pointed out, the arcane swordsage is pure insanity.

But considering that people are always screaming "Core is brokenezt" due to equally insane things nobody will ever use, why does ToB gets a free pass?

Basically, how come aparently people suddenly become able to refluff at will and close rules holes with ToB, but not with any other books?

NEO|Phyte
2010-01-12, 11:25 AM
I think you are missing the main point, Swordsage can use light armor and still gain their Wisdom bonus to AC, unarmed swordsage cant do that, light armor proficiency would be a waste for them.

Strictly speaking, unarmed swordsages don't lose wis to AC in light armor, they just lose the armor proficiency. RAI, yeah, you're probably right, but them's the breaks.

Doc Roc
2010-01-12, 11:27 AM
Because to close the holes in core, I need to ban three classes.

How many classes does ToB have?


Huh, 3.

Stegyre
2010-01-12, 11:30 AM
The unarmed swordsage variant works as is based off the book's suggestions.
This. Everyone accepts the UA SS removes light armor proficiency and grants monk unarmed damage. No real mystery as to how it works, and a very good substitute for the core monk, which many/most/all believe to be hopelessly underpowered.

Arcane SS, by contrast, has only a very vague description of how it should operate. At its broadest, it would be hopelessly broken (in a favorable direction), as others have noted: we are talking about a "wizard" with two good saves, d6 hit dice, and (most importantly) virtually unlimited casting.. Based upon the text description, this was not at all what was intended, as there are vague references to focusing on particular schools, and conceptually, the Arc SS could work, but it would require extensive homebrewing by a dedicated GM to identify spells that make viable "manuevers" and rule out those that do not.

NEO|Phyte
2010-01-12, 11:31 AM
Because to close the holes in core, I need to ban three classes.

How many classes does ToB have?


Huh, 3.

Also, those core classes are actual CLASSES, not a "oh, you could maybe tweak your swordsage to use spells if you like".

Boci
2010-01-12, 11:35 AM
Basically, how come aparently people suddenly become able to refluff at will and close rules holes with ToB, but not with any other books?

Refluffing is not what the core nooks of D&D need. Its burning and reprinting. ToB has one broken maneuver (white raven tactics), one really badly worded maneuver (iron heart surge), a couple of slightly badly worded maneuvers (fire snake springs to mind), a broken variant class and a PrC that is far more powerful than anything else in the book.

Now how many flaws does core have?

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-12, 11:41 AM
Now how many flaws does core have?

None at all :smalltongue:

hamishspence
2010-01-12, 11:43 AM
None at all :smalltongue:

True- Flaws are in Unearthed Arcana :smallbiggrin:

Androgeus
2010-01-12, 11:47 AM
Because to close the holes in core, I need to ban three classes.

How many classes does ToB have?


Huh, 3.

The number of classes need to be banned in core is three and there are that many classes in TaB, so they must be equally as broken as the 3 core ones?
... or have I got the wrong end of the stick, the three ToB classes are to replace the banned core classes?

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-12, 11:48 AM
Doc Roc bans Fighter, Monk, and Paladin.

Oslecamo
2010-01-12, 11:49 AM
Also, those core classes are actual CLASSES, not a "oh, you could maybe tweak your swordsage to use spells if you like".

How many other "tweaks" you ever saw being considered as actual classes as the unarmed swordsage in the discussions on this forum? PHB has a quite nice fighter variant with less proefeciencies but more skills, not broken or overpowered at all, but I never saw anyone sugest it for actual gameplay.

d13
2010-01-12, 11:54 AM
Okay, seriously?
Arcane Swordsage is considerably more powerful than wizard.
There's no good parallel between these two examples.

It's the same train of thought. People ban Arcane Swordsages because "they are variant rules yaddayaddayadda", not because they are stupidly overpowered, but then they go around encouraging people to play Unarmed Swordsages, whose ruling is... The same?

It is a parallel between those people, and the ones who complain that melee can't have nice things, but ban anything that makes them effective, albeit not a good one, I admit :smalltongue:.

Optimystik
2010-01-12, 11:55 AM
Forget, not ignore. Humans forget rules, munchkins ignore them.

This, thank you.


Okay, seriously?
Arcane Swordsage is considerably more powerful than wizard.
There's no good parallel between these two examples.

Also this.

It's like somebody chiming in "Why don't you be a Spell to Power Erudite or Planar Shepherd?" in every optimization discussion.

Because your DM will throw books at your head, that's why.


Doc Roc bans Fighter, Monk, and Paladin.

As would I - or keep the names and slap them on the ToB trinity.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-12, 12:05 PM
Oslecamo, let me ask you: Is there a problem here?

Lycanthromancer
2010-01-12, 12:32 PM
The number of classes need to be banned in core is three and there are that many classes in TaB, so they must be equally as broken as the 3 core ones?"First shalt thou take out the Holy Trinity of Terror, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedest on to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest the Replacement Three towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.

taltamir
2010-01-12, 12:39 PM
As would I - or keep the names and slap them on the ToB trinity.

good idea...

actually, how about a game where the only classes allowed are classes with maneuvers (ToB) and classes with invocations (warlock and the like)?

ex cathedra
2010-01-12, 12:45 PM
My preferred 'core' classes would be ToB+XpH(-soulknife). Ardent and Factotum would be welcome, too. I'm not too fond of warlocks, though. I find them to be just a bit less boring than straight fighters.

Bayar
2010-01-12, 12:46 PM
good idea...

actually, how about a game where the only classes allowed are classes with maneuvers (ToB) and classes with invocations (warlock and the like)?

If only WotC made that into, oh I dunno, a new edition...

Kylarra
2010-01-12, 12:53 PM
good idea...

actually, how about a game where the only classes allowed are classes with maneuvers (ToB) and classes with invocations (warlock and the like)?Yeah, if only we had a game where we had powers that were usable per encounter and those that were usable at-will...

Oslecamo
2010-01-12, 12:55 PM
Oslecamo, let me ask you: Is there a problem here?

Not exactly here, but on all the other threads where the most broken reading is considered the correct one.

Why is such logic limited to ToB?

I've seen plent of people claim that a charm effect basically makes the target your mindless slave, stretching the meaning of "friendly" untill it's not fun anymore. Aparently, "friends" obey your every whim and will gladly die for your profit. Animal companions are also always considered mind controled robots. Also, knowledge checks will give you knowledge of the ADN of a creature, despite the skill itself stating that you get to know just one or two details, at the DM's choice. Nightsticks stack because, well, they clearly weren't strong enough whitout stacking.

But horribly worded IHS? Everybody calmly acepts that you can't IHS the sun, or something else silly like that, and pretty much everybody agrees that it should only work for stuff that "makes sense".

So, what's the trick with ToB that makes people behave logically when reading it, and prevents them from trying to twist every rule on it for their own profit? Some kind of anti-munchkin repellant?

deuxhero
2010-01-12, 01:01 PM
1.I don't ever have experience with Charm Person being used like that (though it may be due to a high number of bans of enchantment).
2.Either you control it, or the DM controls it. For obvious reasons, the player controlling his class feature is chosen more often.
3.ADN?
4.Don't Nightsticks give a bonus type that does.

IHS has a clear RAI that it can't stop the sun. Charm was likely intended to stop you from being attacked and your AC was likely meant to follow your commands like a loyal ally would and without DMM, turn attempts are pretty worthless.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-12, 01:02 PM
Not exactly here, but on all the other threads where the most broken reading is considered the correct one.

Why is such logic limited to ToB?
Unless you're talking about specific people, this discussion is pointless. It's entirely possible different people visit the threads, for example.


I've seen plent of people claim that a charm effect basically makes the target your mindless slave, stretching the meaning of "friendly" untill it's not fun anymore. Aparently, "friends" obey your every whim and will gladly die for your profit.
I've never seen this. Care to provide a citation?


Animal companions are also always considered mind controled robots.
Never seen this one before either.


Also, knowledge checks will give you knowledge of the ADN of a creature, despite the skill itself stating that you get to know just one or two details, at the DM's choice.
That is not how the skill works if we go by the description in the books.

"In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monsterís HD. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information."

Oslecamo
2010-01-12, 01:13 PM
1.I don't ever have experience with Charm Person being used like that (though it may be due to a high number of bans of enchantment).

Never heard of the stories of the charmed tarrasque being used as a pet of the party? Or how to get armies of charmed monsters?



2.Either you control it, or the DM controls it. For obvious reasons, the player controlling his class feature is chosen more often.

But it should be the DM. And then we have people gloating on how the druid gets two characters for the price of one.



3.ADN?

DNA.



Pharaoh's Fist:About skills, you'll notice that unless you can get a knowledge check on the hundreds range, there will always be information missing.



4.Don't Nightsticks give a bonus type that does.

Only the feat does. Nightstick is an item, but it has no clause that it stacks with itself, so by RAW it doesn't stack.



IHS has a clear RAI that it can't stop the sun.

No it isn't clear and we both know it.



Charm was likely intended to stop you from being attacked and your AC was likely meant to follow your commands like a loyal ally would and

You're thus strenghtening my point, that people will normally follow whatever interpretation grants them more power, regardless of intention.



without DMM, turn attempts are pretty worthless.
DMM and nightsticks are two different things. Plus there's plenty of less broken but still good alternate uses for turn atempts. And hey, ever saw a ranger who never meets his favored enemies? The cleric at least will still be a fullcaster.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-12, 01:16 PM
Pharaoh's Fist:About skills, you'll notice that unless you can get a knowledge check on the hundreds range, there will always be information missing..

I believe that the phrase "despite the skill itself stating that you get to know just one or two details" is still incorrect?

Stegyre
2010-01-12, 01:29 PM
It's the same train of thought. People ban Arcane Swordsages because "they are variant rules yaddayaddayadda", not because they are stupidly overpowered, but then they go around encouraging people to play Unarmed Swordsages, whose ruling is... The same?
It's like all the contradicting posts are blocked by an invisible "ignore button."

People ban Arcane SS "because they are stupidly overpowered!" People readily invite the UA SS, because it is not, and instead "fixes" serious failings of the core monk.




(And Doc Roc: give me back my cStP Erudite!)

Lord of Syntax
2010-01-12, 01:31 PM
Because your DM will throw books at your head, that's why.

That's why I like PbP :smalltongue:

The Glyphstone
2010-01-12, 01:34 PM
Knowledge skills are problematic because of the 'useful' terminology...who decides what's useful, the DM or the player? I was playing a blaster wizard in a game who rolled exceptionally high for Know: The Planes against a Galbrezu. I requested information about its elemental resistances and immunities as what I would consider useful above anything else - the DM responded by telling me "it has DR/Good, a high AC, and can do lots of damage to someone within reach when it attacks". Yeah, that might be useful to a fighter/melee, but none of that is even the least bit helpful to a caster.

Doc Roc
2010-01-12, 02:02 PM
(And Doc Roc: give me back my cStP Erudite!)

I'm sorry, I didn't want to be the one that brought the news, but Cpl. Stp. Erudite is never coming home. He was a good soldier, and will be missed.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-12, 02:06 PM
But it should be the DM. And then we have people gloating on how the druid gets two characters for the price of one.

Why? Do you have any rules showing that the DM should run the animal companion?

Mystic Muse
2010-01-12, 02:13 PM
But it should be the DM. And then we have people gloating on how the druid gets two characters for the price of one.


bad idea bad idea bad idea. The DM can effectively kill you as soon as he wants you to die already. when the DM gets control of your mount/arcane familer/animal companion that's just asking for trouble.

Stegyre
2010-01-12, 03:24 PM
I'm sorry, I didn't want to be the one that brought the news, but Cpl. Stp. Erudite is never coming home. He was a good soldier, and will be missed.
But . . . but . . . :smalleek:

(inconsolable sobbing)


(nose blowing)



(Eeeeeeew! What was that?)

R.I.P., Corporal.
You were an officer and a beautifully over-powered gentleman.

CharOp war is Hell.

lord_khaine
2010-01-12, 03:26 PM
Yeah, if only we had a game where we had powers that were usable per encounter and those that were usable at-will...

Yeah, if only we had a system like that, that still managet to stay true to the core parts of 3.5

Kylarra
2010-01-12, 03:27 PM
Yeah, if only we had a system like that, that still managet to stay true to the core parts of 3.5You mean broken at inception? :smallyuk:

Doc Roc
2010-01-12, 06:43 PM
R.I.P., Corporal.
You were an officer and a beautifully over-powered gentleman.

CharOp war is Hell.

The gorram truth. He and his, well, they went down with the rest of Gleemax in the Second Great Ignominy. I'm very sorry.


You mean broken at inception? :smallyuk:

Fortunately, we got that part.
Orb. Wizards.
Infinite Loop Rangers.

4e has had its share of terrible mishaps. It is just fortunate to have better errata. Take your cheap shots at better targets, like oWoD.

Kylarra
2010-01-12, 07:16 PM
4e has had its share of terrible mishaps. It is just fortunate to have better errata. Take your cheap shots at better targets, like oWoD.Unfortunately, I'm unfamiliar with oWoD, so I'll just drop the subject for now. An edition war is probably not worth bringing up again in this thread.:smalltongue:

tyckspoon
2010-01-12, 07:32 PM
How many other "tweaks" you ever saw being considered as actual classes as the unarmed swordsage in the discussions on this forum? PHB has a quite nice fighter variant with less proefeciencies but more skills, not broken or overpowered at all, but I never saw anyone sugest it for actual gameplay.

We mention classes and class variants in direct relation to their relevance to frequent thread topics. There are many, many, many threads on the topics of "How do I make Monks/a monk-like concept not suck?" and "What can I do to rein in Druids?" Hence many mentions of Unarmed Swordsage and Shapeshift Druid. There aren't all that many discussions about "How can I make a skilled fighter work?", so there isn't that much chatter about Thug Fighters/Bonus Feat Rogues/Rogue-Swashbuckler Daring Outlaws. It's a not a conspiracy or disdain for other class variants. People just raise topics where the Unarmed Swordsage is relevant at a markedly higher frequency.

grautry
2010-01-13, 09:29 AM
But it should be the DM. And then we have people gloating on how the druid gets two characters for the price of one.

What?

Are you forgetting that an Animal Companion is a heavily trained(Bonus Tricks + Handle Animal as a class skill for Druids) loyal animal that the druid has a special connection to(Link)?

Why shouldn't it obey the Druid to the extent of its abilities?

I don't see any reasonable justification for the DM running the AC especially since it's not like animals have any complex abilities.

I mean, okay, maybe the DM can disagree if you give the AC some sort of a complex order but in 90% of cases you'll be able to get the AC to do whatever you want by the way of tricks alone.