PDA

View Full Version : Tome of Battle Question



Drolyt
2010-01-27, 03:41 PM
I'm a bit confused about how initiator level works, and it is important for a PrC I'm homebrewing. Does initiator level from different martial adept classes stack? Say if I were to make a Swordsage 6/Crusader 6 for some odd reason, would I have initiator level 12 in both classes or initiator level 9 in each class? I thought it was the former, but I read a post that disagrees. As a side note, the PrC is supposed to be entered from a non martial adept class and grants maneuvers, so I'm trying to figure out how to balance a feature that is essentially practiced spellcaster for initiator levels.

Mongoose87
2010-01-27, 03:44 PM
You get half initiator level from other Martial Adept base classes, and full from Martial Adept PRCs.

It would be hard to unbalance such a feature. Same limitations - can't be above your total HD - would keep you to a reasonable Initiator Level.

Douglas
2010-01-27, 03:48 PM
You would have Initiator Level 9 in each class. I think the book even specifically uses a base class/base class character in the example for calculating IL, so this is quite definite.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 03:50 PM
You get half initiator level from other Martial Adept base classes, and full from Martial Adept PRCs.

It would be hard to unbalance such a feature. Same limitations - can't be above your total HD - would keep you to a reasonable Initiator Level.

Alright. I haven't actually figured out exactly how the class will work, to get 9th level maneuvers it would have to either be taken at a late level or else have the base class continue progression somehow. I just didn't want someone to be able to take the base class, then my homebrewed PrC, and then top it off with a martial adept class. Thanks.
Ninja'd while typing:

You would have Initiator Level 9 in each class. I think the book even specifically uses a base class/base class character in the example for calculating IL, so this is quite definite.
Alright. Thanks for the reply.

Darrin
2010-01-27, 05:46 PM
Alright. I haven't actually figured out exactly how the class will work, to get 9th level maneuvers it would have to either be taken at a late level or else have the base class continue progression somehow. I just didn't want someone to be able to take the base class, then my homebrewed PrC, and then top it off with a martial adept class.

Each base Martial Adept class calculates its IL independently, but Martial Adept PrCs add their full level to all Martial Adept base classes.

For example, a Swordsage 6/Warblade 4/Master of Nine 5 has two ILs: Swordsage IL = 13 (6 + 2 + 5), and Warblade IL = 12 (4 + 3 + 5).

Only PrCs that specifically advance maneuvers/stances in their description add their full levels to IL. For example, Master of Nine has a block of text that says it advances maneuvers/stances, but Bloodstorm Blade does not, so Bloodstorm Blade only adds 1/2 its levels to IL. If you're making a homebrew PrC, keep that in mind. If you want it to advance IL, just follow the template the other PrCs use in ToB.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 05:56 PM
Each base Martial Adept class calculates its IL independently, but Martial Adept PrCs add their full level to all Martial Adept base classes.

For example, a Swordsage 6/Warblade 4/Master of Nine 5 has two ILs: Swordsage IL = 13 (6 + 2 + 5), and Warblade IL = 12 (4 + 3 + 5).

Only PrCs that specifically advance maneuvers/stances in their description add their full levels to IL. For example, Master of Nine has a block of text that says it advances maneuvers/stances, but Bloodstorm Blade does not, so Bloodstorm Blade only adds 1/2 its levels to IL. If you're making a homebrew PrC, keep that in mind. If you want it to advance IL, just follow the template the other PrCs use in ToB.

No no, you misunderstood me. This PrC will be entered by a class that (most likely) isn't a martial adept (most likely a homebrewed Paladin variant I am working on) and it will have it's own maneuver progression. I needed to know whether adding levels of a martial adept class would increase the initiator level of the PrC. Moreover, the PrC will gain the ability to count Paladin levels as full initiator levels for the purposes of what maneuvers and stances the PrC can learn.

DragoonWraith
2010-01-27, 06:27 PM
Typically, yes. All ToB PrCs have their own maneuver progression, and typically add their IL to the IL of all martial adept base classes. Unless you specifically say otherwise, that will be the case here.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 06:34 PM
Typically, yes. All ToB PrCs have their own maneuver progression, and typically add their IL to the IL of all martial adept base classes. Unless you specifically say otherwise, that will be the case here.

Hmm. I'll have to specific about it then. If it makes my intentions more clear, think of it like Sublime Chord or Ur-Priest or some other PrC that has it's own spellcasting progression (as opposed to increasing caster levels of the base class), except it will have maneuvers.

tyckspoon
2010-01-27, 06:42 PM
Hmm. I'll have to specific about it then. If it makes my intentions more clear, think of it like Sublime Chord or Ur-Priest or some other PrC that has it's own spellcasting progression (as opposed to increasing caster levels of the base class), except it will have maneuvers.

Generally speaking, everything contributes to initiator level at the usual 1/2 value, whether it's a martial adept class or not. If you don't desire that, you'll need to add explicit language to the class in the same way you are making an addition for Paladin levels to count fully.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 06:50 PM
Generally speaking, everything contributes to initiator level at the usual 1/2 value, whether it's a martial adept class or not. If you don't desire that, you'll need to add explicit language to the class in the same way you are making an addition for Paladin levels to count fully.

I don't mind half-initiator level, that's just normal, I don't even mind of the initiator level of other martial adepts stacks with this PrC. However, I do not want this PrC to add to the initiator level of, say, the Warblade, since this PrC will gain significant maneuver progression as its meant to be a standalone martial adept in PrC form. By the way, where is everyone on here getting their info? ToB is really poorly organized, where do I even find info on how PrCs advance initiator levels?

tyckspoon
2010-01-27, 06:55 PM
I don't mind half-initiator level, that's just normal, I don't even mind of the initiator level of other martial adepts stacks with this PrC. However, I do not want this PrC to add to the initiator level of, say, the Warblade, since this PrC will gain significant maneuver progression as its meant to be a standalone martial adept in PrC form.

Oh. Then.. just say it doesn't. "The focus required to follow the path of...blablabla... levels in this class do not advance the initiator level of any other classes that grant martial maneuvers. This is an exception to the normal rules for multiclassing and initiator level." Done. The standard rules only matter so far as you should know when you need to make it clear that you're changing them.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 06:59 PM
Oh. Then.. just say it doesn't. "The focus required to follow the path of...blablabla... levels in this class do not advance the initiator level of any other classes that grant martial maneuvers. This is an exception to the normal rules for multiclassing and initiator level." Done. The standard rules only matter so far as you should know when you need to make it clear that you're changing them.

Precisely. I didn't realize martial adept PrCs automatically added to the initiator level of all martial adept base classes until it was pointed out in this thread. Anyways thanks for the reply.

Douglas
2010-01-27, 07:06 PM
By the way, where is everyone on here getting their info? ToB is really poorly organized, where do I even find info on how PrCs advance initiator levels?
Tome of Battle page 39, and the individual PrC descriptions.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 07:13 PM
Tome of Battle page 39, and the individual PrC descriptions.

Wait, the way I am reading it a PrC doesn't grant full initiator level unless it specifically says so. Some of the posts in this thread disagree. Which is it?

Douglas
2010-01-27, 07:17 PM
7 of the 8 PrCs in ToB state that they count full for initiator level. They don't qualify this statement, so they count fully for all initiator levels you may have.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 07:30 PM
7 of the 8 PrCs in ToB state that they count full for initiator level. They don't qualify this statement, so they count fully for all initiator levels you may have.

So if I don't say anything like that it is not assumed?

DragoonWraith
2010-01-27, 07:44 PM
Well, no, but then the class wouldn't count full for itself, which is a bad plan. You'd have to say something weird like "this class has a separate Maneuver progression from other classes, and does not add its full level to the Initiator Level to other classes that you may know maneuvers from" or something. Basically, this is unprecedented in Tome of Battle, so you need to make it explicit if that's how you want it to work.

Drolyt
2010-01-27, 07:59 PM
Well, no, but then the class wouldn't count full for itself, which is a bad plan. You'd have to say something weird like "this class has a separate Maneuver progression from other classes, and does not add its full level to the Initiator Level to other classes that you may know maneuvers from" or something. Basically, this is unprecedented in Tome of Battle, so you need to make it explicit if that's how you want it to work.

Ok gotcha. I think I understand now. I'll come up with wording that doesn't sound too awkward. Thanks.

Darrin
2010-01-27, 11:58 PM
Ok gotcha. I think I understand now. I'll come up with wording that doesn't sound too awkward. Thanks.

I don't understand why you're so worried about other Martial Adept classes stacking with this PrC. Even if the rest of his levels were all Warblade before going into this PrC, he would still need to be 17th level before he could get 9th level maneuvers (well, ok, there are a couple shenanigans to get around that, but they don't get played much).

How exactly does your PrC allow early access to high-level maneuvers if the PC already has Martial Adept levels from another class?

Drolyt
2010-01-28, 12:08 AM
I don't understand why you're so worried about other Martial Adept classes stacking with this PrC. Even if the rest of his levels were all Warblade before going into this PrC, he would still need to be 17th level before he could get 9th level maneuvers (well, ok, there are a couple shenanigans to get around that, but they don't get played much).

How exactly does your PrC allow early access to high-level maneuvers if the PC already has Martial Adept levels from another class?

I'm probably worried over nothing, but I always try to be much more cautious than WotC when making rules. My original fear was based on my misunderstanding that all initiator levels stacked, but now I'm mainly worried about builds something like the following: Paladin 5/PrC that is essentially Paladin + maneuvers 10/Eternal Champion 4/Warblade 1, which would give the warblade like 5 9th level maneuvers at initiator level 17 if my PrC worked like the others do. This wouldn't be so bad, but my Paladin variant I've been working on is as strong as a martial adept class on its own, once this PrC is added they are both powerful and versatile, and adding a crapload of 9th level warblade maneuvers would seem to me unbalanced. Although maybe I'm making the maneuver equals martial spell connection too strongly here and a bunch of 9th level maneuvers isn't overpowered at all.

Darrin
2010-01-28, 12:28 AM
I'm mainly worried about builds something like the following: Paladin 5/PrC that is essentially Paladin + maneuvers 10/Eternal Champion 4/Warblade 1, which would give the warblade like 5 9th level maneuvers at initiator level 17 if my PrC worked like the others do.

I'm still confused, but if you had 10 levels of a Martial Adept base class followed by Eternal Champion 4, then Warblade 1, the Warblade's IL would be 10 (Non-Warblade/2 + 4 + 1), which would only be good for 5th level maneuvers. Not sure how you get IL 17 from only 15 levels. When you take that Warblade level, you add Eternal Champion 4 to Warblade 1 for IL = 5, but you don't add the Eternal Champion to anything else. That "Paladin + maneuvers 10" only counts for +5 IL as far as the Warblade is concerned.

You may be overestimating the 9th level maneuvers as well. Most of them are just a standard action that does a lot of damage. A lot of damage doesn't really "win" D&D. Timestop Twin Split Ray Fell Drain Scorching Enervation wins. Most of the really "bwa-WOKEN" combos in ToB involve mid-range maneuvers.

Tokiko Mima
2010-01-28, 02:21 AM
I had a fun build a while ago that was something like Monk 2/Unarmed Swordsage 2/Crusader 2/Warblade 1/Shadow Sun Ninja 5/Bloodclaw Master 3/Master of Nine 5 (not all in that order.) It got a ton of maneuvers, and eventually grabbed all the good 9th level ones. The whole point of it was to get as many maneuvers readied to count as Crusader Granted Maneuvers, so I could use their awesome refresh to full advantage.

Turned out to be kind of a waste in actual D&D. Fights end in 3 or 4 rounds usually, so I really wasn't that much better off than a straight warblade. It did have the advantage of always having something new and different to try in almost every fight, though. I think in general, the initiator level system is superior to the spellcasting/meldshaping/psionic/etc. advancement, where you have to focus on an individual skill and heaven help you if you try to do anything else well.

If I was rewriting 3.5 D&D, every class specific feature would advance like IL does. :smallsmile:

Drolyt
2010-01-28, 10:56 AM
I'm still confused, but if you had 10 levels of a Martial Adept base class followed by Eternal Champion 4, then Warblade 1, the Warblade's IL would be 10 (Non-Warblade/2 + 4 + 1), which would only be good for 5th level maneuvers. Not sure how you get IL 17 from only 15 levels. When you take that Warblade level, you add Eternal Champion 4 to Warblade 1 for IL = 5, but you don't add the Eternal Champion to anything else. That "Paladin + maneuvers 10" only counts for +5 IL as far as the Warblade is concerned.

You may be overestimating the 9th level maneuvers as well. Most of them are just a standard action that does a lot of damage. A lot of damage doesn't really "win" D&D. Timestop Twin Split Ray Fell Drain Scorching Enervation wins. Most of the really "bwa-WOKEN" combos in ToB involve mid-range maneuvers.

Well, yes, if I treated that PrC as a martial adept base class. But if I worded it incorrectly it could be interpreted as stacking with all other initiator levels like Eternal blade does.

I had a fun build a while ago that was something like Monk 2/Unarmed Swordsage 2/Crusader 2/Warblade 1/Shadow Sun Ninja 5/Bloodclaw Master 3/Master of Nine 5 (not all in that order.) It got a ton of maneuvers, and eventually grabbed all the good 9th level ones. The whole point of it was to get as many maneuvers readied to count as Crusader Granted Maneuvers, so I could use their awesome refresh to full advantage.

Turned out to be kind of a waste in actual D&D. Fights end in 3 or 4 rounds usually, so I really wasn't that much better off than a straight warblade. It did have the advantage of always having something new and different to try in almost every fight, though. I think in general, the initiator level system is superior to the spellcasting/meldshaping/psionic/etc. advancement, where you have to focus on an individual skill and heaven help you if you try to do anything else well.

If I was rewriting 3.5 D&D, every class specific feature would advance like IL does.
Well, one of the homebrew rules I'm working on will make combat longer, so you would be able to use all your maneuvers.

Darrin
2010-01-28, 05:34 PM
[QUOTE=Drolyt;7781370]Well, yes, if I treated that PrC as a martial adept base class. But if I worded it incorrectly it could be interpreted as stacking with all other initiator levels like Eternal blade does.

Huh? Yes, Eternal Blade adds its full levels to any Martial Adept base class, but only once for that class. A Swordsage 5/Warblade 5/Eternal Blade 10 has an IL of 17.5, and only gets a 9th level maneuver at level 20.

Drolyt
2010-01-28, 05:48 PM
[QUOTE=Drolyt;7781370]Well, yes, if I treated that PrC as a martial adept base class. But if I worded it incorrectly it could be interpreted as stacking with all other initiator levels like Eternal blade does.

Huh? Yes, Eternal Blade adds its full levels to any Martial Adept base class, but only once for that class. A Swordsage 5/Warblade 5/Eternal Blade 10 has an IL of 17.5, and only gets a 9th level maneuver at level 20.

That's correct. However, if you somehow were able to get into a martial adept prestige class as, say, a Swordsage 3/Warblade 3, took it for 10 levels, then took 4 more levels in another martial adept prestige class, your initiator level in both classes would be 3 + 10 + 4 + 1.5 or 18.5. Well, okay that's not that broken, but it would be stronger than just going Warblade 20.

Susano-wo
2010-01-28, 09:07 PM
just a FYI: any other class adds +1/2 IL to your character. It states that it does not have to be a Martial Adept Class

Darrin
2010-01-28, 10:05 PM
That's correct. However, if you somehow were able to get into a martial adept prestige class as, say, a Swordsage 3/Warblade 3, took it for 10 levels, then took 4 more levels in another martial adept prestige class, your initiator level in both classes would be 3 + 10 + 4 + 1.5 or 18.5. Well, okay that's not that broken, but it would be stronger than just going Warblade 20.

No, it wouldn't. A Warblade 20 gets 9th level maneuvers at ECL 17.

A Swordsage 3/Warblade 3/Prc1 10/Prc2 4 gets 9th level maneuvers at ECL 19, two levels later than a straight Warblade.

deuxhero
2010-01-28, 10:08 PM
7 of the 8 PrCs in ToB state that they count full for initiator level. They don't qualify this statement, so they count fully for all initiator levels you may have.

What's the deal with the 8th?

Mongoose87
2010-01-28, 10:11 PM
What's the deal with the 8th?

It's useless, unless you like throwing stuff.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 06:18 AM
It's useless, unless you like throwing stuff.

Most of them seam worthless to me. Or at least a couple of them just seem better than the rest.

Darrin
2010-01-29, 06:31 AM
What's the deal with the 8th?

Although it's not so obvious in the rules, for whatever reason the designers decided that Bloodstorm Blade doesn't advance maneuvers or initiator levels. There's a paragraph in the text of each other PrC that describes how they advance maneuvers and IL, and the BB doesn't have it.

As far as throwing things, though... since it allows you to treat ranged attacks as melee, it opens up a pandora's box of insane damage combos for thrown weapons that previously only worked for melee.

Runestar
2010-01-29, 06:31 AM
One important thing to bear in mind for those ToB prcs is that unlike martial adept base classes, they do not allow you to swap in new maneuvers every even lv.

So while you may be ahead in terms of number of maneuvers readied, you tend to be behind in the quality of the maneuvers you can ready.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 06:41 AM
No, it wouldn't. A Warblade 20 gets 9th level maneuvers at ECL 17.

A Swordsage 3/Warblade 3/Prc1 10/Prc2 4 gets 9th level maneuvers at ECL 19, two levels later than a straight Warblade.

You know something, the more I think about it the more I doubt that it is really overpowered in any way. I suppose that's what you were trying to tell me.

PhoenixRivers
2010-01-29, 06:52 AM
It's useless, unless you like throwing stuff.

But if you do, it's pure gold. Aside from previous comments, the level 10 ability is an army-killer.

Combine it with even a modest Hulking Hurler (by modest, I mean a Low-LA race like Half Ogre, and no str/encumbrance pumping shenanigans)?

And you very easily can turn cities to rubble in under a minute.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 07:04 AM
But if you do, it's pure gold. Aside from previous comments, the level 10 ability is an army-killer.

Combine it with even a modest Hulking Hurler (by modest, I mean a Low-LA race like Half Ogre, and no str/encumbrance pumping shenanigans)?

And you very easily can turn cities to rubble in under a minute.

I would never want to play that build. Very narrowly focused on doing one broken thing. That's no fun. Really, the improvised throwing rules in complete warrior are one of the most stupid mistakes WotC ever made.

PhoenixRivers
2010-01-29, 08:03 AM
I would never want to play that build. Very narrowly focused on doing one broken thing. That's no fun. Really, the improvised throwing rules in complete warrior are one of the most stupid mistakes WotC ever made.

It's not a build that's played by players. It's a build, occasionally introduced by a DM, to provide a challenge to players, without going stupid bad.

For example:

Elite array half ogre, with a 15 Str base, +6 racial, and +3 for levels (level 12-15), has a 24 Str.

For a large creature of that type? 466 pound light load, which translates to a 5d6 damage rock.

Even if you beef this guy up with a Belt +4? 800 pound load, which is a 7d6 rock.

Add in Rage on top of that (+4 str)? 1384 pound load, which is a 9d6 rock.

At reasonable levels, it's not bad. It's only when dealing with quadruped grafts, extra size modifiers, and the halk million strength boosters out there that it becomes scary bad.

Still... 7d6 damage a round to most of a city? Will rubble it. And that's not Hulking Hurler's fault. That's the fault of BSB's capstone.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 08:37 AM
It's not a build that's played by players. It's a build, occasionally introduced by a DM, to provide a challenge to players, without going stupid bad.

For example:

Elite array half ogre, with a 15 Str base, +6 racial, and +3 for levels (level 12-15), has a 24 Str.

For a large creature of that type? 466 pound light load, which translates to a 5d6 damage rock.

Even if you beef this guy up with a Belt +4? 800 pound load, which is a 7d6 rock.

Add in Rage on top of that (+4 str)? 1384 pound load, which is a 9d6 rock.

At reasonable levels, it's not bad. It's only when dealing with quadruped grafts, extra size modifiers, and the halk million strength boosters out there that it becomes scary bad.

Still... 7d6 damage a round to most of a city? Will rubble it. And that's not Hulking Hurler's fault. That's the fault of BSB's capstone.

Hulking Hurler can crush a city under a moon without any help from BSB. Though I agree it really should only be for enemies anyways.

Runestar
2010-01-29, 08:46 AM
Except that as a PC, you should never be facing an army made up of cr1 mooks or ever find yourself having to decimate an entire city as a standard action. You will likely be facing equal-cr enemies, and making only 1 attack/round against each of them just won't cut it. You want to focus fire and take each down (or at least disable it) ASAP.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 09:00 AM
Except that as a PC, you should never be facing an army made up of cr1 mooks or ever find yourself having to decimate an entire city as a standard action. You will likely be facing equal-cr enemies, and making only 1 attack/round against each of them just won't cut it. You want to focus fire and take each down (or at least disable it) ASAP.

Not really true. A 5th Level Warblade 10th level bloodstorm blade 3rd level hulking hurler Class with umd 2 Human with enlarge person made permanent can get a scroll of giant size at caster level 19th and chuck huge balls of lead at every enemy he can see, doing thousands of damage each. Why you would want a character like that, I'm not sure, but it should work if I didn't screw something up in my reasoning. Even if for some reason it doesn't work I'm sure I would just have to modify it slightly.

Runestar
2010-01-29, 09:03 AM
I am fairly sure the lead balls shrink back to their normal size the moment they leave your hands. Regardless, how does the damage stack up?

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 09:15 AM
I am fairly sure the lead balls shrink back to their normal size the moment they leave your hands. Regardless, how does the damage stack up?

The lead balls wouldn't rely on giant size, you would carry them pre-sized in a bag of holding or something. Anyways, if I recall correctly an improvised weapon does 5d6 damage at 400 lbs., +1d6 for every 200 lbs. thereafter. A Hulking Hurler can, if i recall correctly, throw anything up to his medium load. Giant Size makes you collosal and adds +32 Str, assuming you already had a Str of 34 (18 +5 from levels, +5 from tome, +6 from belt), that's 66 Str. According to the SRD here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm), that's 2,510,848 lb, or 12,557d6+28. This is all assuming I've made no mistakes, and I'm not sure how big a 2 million pound lead ball would be, so you might need to go smaller.

Runestar
2010-01-29, 09:19 AM
Um...okay...:smalltongue:

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 09:22 AM
Um...okay...:smalltongue:

And yet my build pales in comparison to a simple initiate of the sevenfold veil...
Edit: Come to think of it, couldn't a Wu Jen with a decent strength score cast giant size, pick up some gigantic object weighing over a million pounds, cast fly, and drop it on someone's head? Much easier than my stupid build.

Blackfang108
2010-01-29, 09:27 AM
And yet my build pales in comparison to a simple initiate of the sevenfold veil...

Doesn't everything?

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 09:36 AM
Doesn't everything?

Properly built DMM Clerics are almost as invulnerable as IotSV, and Incantatrix can do almost anything a DMM Cleric can and a ton of things they can't, but I believe the standard for brokenness is a Wizard 5/IotSV 7/Incantatrix 8, or maybe Wizard 3/Master Specialist 2/IotSV 7/Incatrix 8. There's also that gnome only prestige class, something about shadows, that lets you cast any spell in the game at more than 100% real (not sure how that works), and you don't even have to prepare the spells ahead of time. And just for good measure, Pun Pun.

Tinydwarfman
2010-01-29, 09:59 AM
There's also that gnome only prestige class, something about shadows, that lets you cast any spell in the game at more than 100% real (not sure how that works), and you don't even have to prepare the spells ahead of time.

To quote the Pharaoh,

You weak minded fools! If you had the strength of will to look past his illusionary fire, you would see that - OH GOD, IT BURNS! IT BURNS EVEN HOTTER THAN THE REAL THING!

20d6 fire damage. Will save for 28d6. Reflex save for half.
Teehee!

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 10:02 AM
To quote the Pharaoh,

20d6 fire damage. Will save for 28d6. Reflex save for half.
Teehee!

I think you can autofail a save if you want. So yeah...

Tinydwarfman
2010-01-29, 10:47 AM
I think you can autofail a save if you want. So yeah...

Aw, stop ruining my fun...:smallbiggrin:

The Glyphstone
2010-01-29, 11:22 AM
I think you can autofail a save if you want. So yeah...

But to be fair to the caster, enemies shouldn't be voluntarily failing the Disbelieve save until they've successfully disbelieved it at least once and figured out (the hard way) that recognizing the spells' true nature hurts more, especially ones with Spellcraft who recognize the Shadow Evocation (it's supposed to hurt a lot less). Enemies too stupid to deduce this probably aren't making their Will save anyways. And in the end, enemies voluntarily believing your spells just means you lost the extra damage, and still have a normal full-powered spell.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 12:23 PM
But to be fair to the caster, enemies shouldn't be voluntarily failing the Disbelieve save until they've successfully disbelieved it at least once and figured out (the hard way) that recognizing the spells' true nature hurts more, especially ones with Spellcraft who recognize the Shadow Evocation (it's supposed to hurt a lot less). Enemies too stupid to deduce this probably aren't making their Will save anyways. And in the end, enemies voluntarily believing your spells just means you lost the extra damage, and still have a normal full-powered spell.

Also there is there is the question of how you believe something you know to be false... At any rate if your using that PrC to deal damage your character deserves to die...

tyckspoon
2010-01-29, 12:34 PM
Properly built DMM Clerics are almost as invulnerable as IotSV, and Incantatrix can do almost anything a DMM Cleric can and a ton of things they can't, but I believe the standard for brokenness is a Wizard 5/IotSV 7/Incantatrix 8, or maybe Wizard 3/Master Specialist 2/IotSV 7/Incatrix 8.

For survivability, perhaps, but otherwise I'm pretty sure the last two levels of Incantatrix are considered more powerful than the last two of Initiate. Kaleidoscopic Doom and the violet veil are nifty, but they don't really compare to the universal metamagic reduction the Incantatrix gets as a cap.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 12:43 PM
For survivability, perhaps, but otherwise I'm pretty sure the last two levels of Incantatrix are considered more powerful than the last two of Initiate. Kaleidoscopic Doom and the violet veil are nifty, but they don't really compare to the universal metamagic reduction the Incantatrix gets as a cap.

True, if I wanted to play a powerful Wizard in a regular campaign I would usually go Wizard 5/Incantatrix 10/Archmage 5, and I would save my most broken spells for when the DM annoyed me. Though I think the Initiate levels give you more edge in a duel situation, since the awesome powers of a properly built Incantatrix will be infective against the Initiate's impervious defenses.

DragoonWraith
2010-01-29, 12:50 PM
Shadowcraft Mage is quite a bit more powerful than any Incantatrix or Iot7V, methinks.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 01:02 PM
Shadowcraft Mage is quite a bit more powerful than any Incantatrix or Iot7V, methinks.

Don't you have to be a gnome or something though? Or is that something else? At any rate breaking the game is so easy that seeing what class breaks it the most is beside the point. Especially since Pun Pun is always stronger. Besides, Wizard spells are so strong that prestige class abilities become kinda moot.

Darrin
2010-01-29, 05:35 PM
You know something, the more I think about it the more I doubt that it is really overpowered in any way. I suppose that's what you were trying to tell me.

Yes, I think we finally understand each other.

What I wasn't sure about was it sounded like your homebrew PrC might have its own rules about adding initiator levels, but I couldn't figure out if you were adding PrC levels more than once or more than +1 IL per level.

Initiator Levels is one of the mechanics ToB did extremely well, although it wasn't explained all that clearly. I wish some of the other "alternative powers" books had used something similar.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:39 PM
Yes, I think we finally understand each other.

What I wasn't sure about was it sounded like your homebrew PrC might have its own rules about adding initiator levels, but I couldn't figure out if you were adding PrC levels more than once or more than +1 IL per level.

Initiator Levels is one of the mechanics ToB did extremely well, although it wasn't explained all that clearly. I wish some of the other "alternative powers" books had used something similar.

ToB was made late in the life of 3.5. Although they still managed to mess some things up in spite of that, particularly the format, the material is rather poorly presented. Also the swordsage recovery mechanic is stupid as hell. As for my PrC, yeah it works slightly differently. Basically it works like a base martial adept class, each level in the PrC is 1 Initiator Level and each level in every other class except martial adept PrCs and paladins adds 1/2 Initiator Level. Paladin, however, will stack with the PrC to determine Initiator Level.