ToB-is it worth it?

[Ilmryn]

After seeing many people on this forum use Tome of Battle in discussions, I am considering buying it. Is it worth it? What sorts of things does it contain? I have seen the terms "martial adept," "maneuver," and "swordsage," but i don't know what they are/can do.

[gbprime]

It's worth it. It's state of the art melee. It lets a warrior type carry a battle as well as a wizard type can carry a battle.

But it's also power level escalation. Your campaign might need some time to get used to it.

[Ilmryn]

It's worth it. It's state of the art melee. It lets a warrior type carry a battle as well as a wizard type can carry a battle.

But it's also power level escalation. Your campaign might need some time to get used to it.

Power level escalation? How exactly?

[Snake-Aes]

"Maneuvers" are basically refluffed spellcasting.

Given the theme, they don't let you reshape reality like spellcasters, but fancy stuff like extra attacks, or attacks that cause conditions, extra sneak attacks, bonuses to maneuvers, extra damage and so on.
Crusaders are warriors that delay the damage they take, and when they have delayed damage to take, they hit harder.
Swordsages are wuxia-style warriors who can perform a huge number of maneuvers, and sometimes two at the same time (striking resemblance to monks)
Warblades are opportunist warriors that deal a huge pack of punch when they can perform stuff like attacks of opportunity, and can eventually hold two stances at the same time.

All in all, it's a good book. The mechanics of maneuvers by themselves are just like that of a spellcaster, except they can recover them in a few minutes instead of hours of rest.

For example: Setting Sun maneuvers let you control the battlefield by defending against charges, hurling enemies across the field or make their attacks hit someone else. Setting Sun stances improve your performance in difficult terrain, or against bigger monsters.
Diamond Mind maneuvers let you perform extra attacks, or use concentration checks to ignore part of the enemy's AC, or replace saves with concentration checks, or do a double move and an attack roll. Diamond Mind stances give you a short-range blindsense, or a balance of ac penalties and bonuses.

[gbprime]

Power level escalation? How exactly?

There are a great many manuvers that allow a warrior type to do an extra 4d6 or more on every hit in a round. And while each manuver can only be used once in a given fight, a character can have enough of them that they're practically doing this kind of bonus damage all the time.

With it, a melee type can make his opponents evaporate faster than a wizard casting maximized chain lightning.

[Iferus]

ToB offers far more capable melee combatants in the later levels (10+). Most DM's agree this is a good thing, because the current ones have to do some serious optimation to contribute when working with casters.

There is some power creep, but only for those who needed a boost.

[Ernir]

Power level escalation? How exactly?

The melee classes in the ToB are significantly easier to make powerful than the PHB melee classes.

Anywho, you asked about the terms.

A "maneuver" is a special attack/defense/fighting technique. These are expended upon use the way spells are, but there is no per-day limitation on them (they can be refreshed using various methods).

A martial adept is someone who knows maneuvers. (Or, even though maneuvers can be learned by taking a feat, someone with levels in a ToB class.)

The Swordsage is one of the three base classes in the book. It is a light melee class, having great mobility and stealth abilities. Often touted as a replacement for the PHB Monk class.

[Zombieboots]

Very worth it. I first picked it up because I like the flavour and when I first flipped through the book I thought "Wow this makes Melee types a little broken"

After having played two (Warblade and Cursader) nothing could be further from the fact. ToB keeps melee types in the game at mid-high levels. It certainly gives them some damage boost but so much more importantly it gives them more utility then just saying "I attack or trip" every round.

I urged one of my "Fighters-are-the-only-class" players to try it and 5 months of test play later, he was onboard as well.

The book is worth every cent.

[Greenish]

ToB excerpt (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a). Includes quick primer to sublime way, which explains the terms.

[Cicciograna]

It's how Melee should have been since the beginning.

It's probabily the best book ever published for the 3.5th Edition.

[DracoDei]

For bonus points, see here:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7623906

Suddenly instead of nine types of martial arts to blend together, you have about 50.
Themes range from the "why didn't Tome of Battle HAVE this" with the disciplines covering various approaches to archery, to something for firearms if you include that in your game, to my own contribution for humor campaigns... a discipline that draws on the primal power of comedy in the way of The Three Stooges and Looney Toons.

[DragoonWraith]

It is the best-written book for 3.5 ever published by Wizards of the Coast, bar none. If I were to play a Core+1 game, Tome of Battle would be that one book, even if I wasn't planning on playing a melee character

Martial Adepts are melee characters that work. The same cannot be said, in my opinion, of any non-Incarnum melee class in existence prior to its publication. Granted, this is for a certain definition of "works" (has multiple options, can do things in a variety of combat and non-combat situations, can keep up with a moderately optimized game without heavy optimization, and all of these benefits are derived from the class's mechanics and not from anything else), but I really don't think it's an unreasonable expectation of a class, and basically every other melee class has failed in this utterly.

[Gnaeus]

It is the best-written book for 3.5 ever published by Wizards of the Coast, bar none. If I were to play a Core+1 game, Tome of Battle would be that one book, even if I wasn't planning on playing a melee character

Martial Adepts are melee characters that work. The same cannot be said, in my opinion, of any non-Incarnum melee class in existence prior to its publication. Granted, this is for a certain definition of "works" (has multiple options, can do things in a variety of combat and non-combat situations, can keep up with a moderately optimized game without heavy optimization, and all of these benefits are derived from the class's mechanics and not from anything else), but I really don't think it's an unreasonable expectation of a class, and basically every other melee class has failed in this utterly.

I didn't think Duskblade was that bad.

[AvatarZero]

There are abilities (maneuvres) in the ToB that are on a similar level to spells of the same level (you need to be 7th level to use 4th level maneuvres, 9th level to use 5th level maneuvres... sound familar?). Generally, they're weaker than the equivalent spell but can be used more often and by a character who is less squishable.

For instance, there's a third level Desert Wind maneuvre (Desert Wind is the fire themed, blatantly supernatural maneuvre path) called Fan the Flames which deals 6d6 fire damage at a range of 30ft. It's like Fireball, but less powerful, shorter range, and only affecting one target.

There's also the ninth level Iron Heart (pure skill themed) maneuvre, Strike of Perfect Clarity, which deals +100 damage to a single target. So it's like Harm, except higher level, lower damage, and triggered in a different way (melee attack instead of touch attack + will save halves).

I'm not too worried about whether it's power escalation, which it is if you're used to Fighters, Monks and Paladins. I just like that it's a way to play a melee class and have actual decisions to make in combat, as opposed to getting to the right spot and full attacking.

[Spiryt]

ToB or not ToB?

[AvatarZero]

ToB or not ToB?

:smallannoyed:

[DragoonWraith]

I didn't think Duskblade was that bad.
But that's a half-caster. True enough, though. Just, in my mind, the Duskblade is kinda like the Meldshapers - they're melee, but they're also magical and therefore automatically get more options that make them better. Still, I suppose Paladins and Rangers do, too, and they don't really work, IMO.

Though, on the Duskblade, 13th level is just way too late to wait for your main class feature. Seriously.

[Shpadoinkle]

There are two things wrong with ToB:

1: It was published FAR too late into the life of 3.Xe
2: Because it was published so late, it never got any errata.

Aside from that, it's my favorite gaming book.

[Lycanthromancer]

It is the best-written book for 3.5 ever published by Wizards of the Coast, bar none. If I were to play a Core+1 game, Tome of Battle would be that one book, even if I wasn't planning on playing a melee character

Martial Adepts are melee characters that work. The same cannot be said, in my opinion, of any non-Incarnum melee class in existence prior to its publication. Granted, this is for a certain definition of "works" (has multiple options, can do things in a variety of combat and non-combat situations, can keep up with a moderately optimized game without heavy optimization, and all of these benefits are derived from the class's mechanics and not from anything else), but I really don't think it's an unreasonable expectation of a class, and basically every other melee class has failed in this utterly.Well, if you're talking about mundane martial classes, sure, but the psychic warrior is right up in tier 3 with martial adepts, as are the bard and factotum (all three of which can be built to be useful all the time, including/especially in the tank roll). Knights aren't too horrible, if you want to take that approach to battlefield control, and there are plenty of other ways to do melee without taking a muggle class (though it's stretching into severely contested territory by that point).

But yes, ToB is one of the best systems martial characters could hope for (barring archery, which makes Lycanthromancer a sad puppy).

[Serenity]

A warning about the flavor. Tome of Battle draws some inspiration from anime, wuxia, and generally 'Eastern' concepts--specifically, positing at least semi-mundane warriors who are capable of performing extraordinary and even supernatural feats without the use of outside magical aid, but rather by willpower and discipline. Not everyone enjoys this type of concept--though I find the fluff isusually fairly easily rewritten and even the swordsage can be built to be little more magical than the monk.

[DragoonWraith]

Well, if you're talking about mundane martial classes, sure, but the psychic warrior is right up in tier 3 with martial adepts, as are the bard and factotum (all three of which can be built to be useful all the time, including/especially in the tank roll). Knights aren't too horrible, if you want to take that approach to battlefield control, and there are plenty of other ways to do melee without taking a muggle class (though it's stretching into severely contested territory by that point).

But yes, ToB is one of the best systems martial characters could hope for (barring archery, which makes Lycanthromancer a sad puppy).
See my commentary on the Duskblade; it applies here, too.


A warning about the flavor. Tome of Battle draws some inspiration from anime, wuxia, and generally 'Eastern' concepts--specifically, positing at least semi-mundane warriors who are capable of performing extraordinary and even supernatural feats without the use of outside magical aid, but rather by willpower and discipline. Not everyone enjoys this type of concept--though I find the fluff isusually fairly easily rewritten and even the swordsage can be built to be little more magical than the monk.
Honestly, despite the fact that there is a side-bar in the book claiming such influences, I really don't see it. There is absolutely nothing in Tome of Battle done by characters that aren't quite within the abilities of non-magical pre-ToB characters, with the possible exception of Ex healing.

[Greenish]

even the swordsage can be built to be little more magical than the monk.Monks are both more magical and more eastern-influenced than warblades or crusaders.

[Thieves]

ToB or not ToB?

:smallbiggrin: Worth a sig, were I currently not on the wagon!


the psychic warrior (...) the bard and factotum (all three of which can be built to be useful all the time, including/especially in the tank roll).

How do you get a bard or a factotum to tank all the time? :smalleek:

[Curmudgeon]

2: Because it was published so late, it never got any errata.
That's not quite true. Tome of Battle got 2½ errata:

Strike of the Broken Shield - fixed
Five-Shadow Creeping Ice Enervation Strike - fixed
Firesnake - partially corrected, before somebody had a massive copy/paste error

[Lycanthromancer]

How do you get a bard or a factotum to tank all the time? :smalleek:With factotums, you get lots of Fonts of Inspiration and boost your Strength and Intelligence as high as you can, then supplement with alter self (via wand, if nothing else), iaijutsu focus, and a few combat feats such as Power Attack and Manyshot.

Bards are great for such things, especially out of core. You have inspire courage optimization (I've got a level 3 bard that can grant the whole party - including himself - +6 to attack and damage), Snowflake War Dance, and potential dips into other classes, such as marshal.

[mabriss lethe]

As a player and a DM.

Good god yes. Buy this book.

I was so tired of having to watch my melee players struggle along at best or just be hood ornaments for the casters so much of the time. When one of them has played a ToB character, it has made all the difference.

(and yes, a factotum kitted out with a few maneuver feats and items is possibly one of the most fun skirmisher characters I've ever played.)

[sofawall]

Tome of Battle classes tend to be more powerful than Fighters at low levels of optimization. Significantly so. Fighters, however, are (I believe) slightly more powerful at levels of high op-fu.

[Greenish]

Fighters, however, are (I believe) slightly more powerful at levels of high op-fu.Really? I'm inclined to disagree, given how a ToB build can pick the choose feats much like fighter, but also has the versatility and defenses of their maneuvers.

[AmberVael]

Tome of Battle classes tend to be more powerful than Fighters at low levels of optimization. Significantly so. Fighters, however, are (I believe) slightly more powerful at levels of high op-fu.

I'm not sure I agree with this.

It is obvious that Tome of Battle characters are much more potent at low levels of optimization, and I have seen certain fighter builds which can achieve some impressive results (in terms of damage, I think a Fighter can potentially deal more damage than a ToB character at the same level, if I recall correctly...)

But I am not convinced that a fighter, even an optimized one, can match a ToB character made with similar skill. Granted, the Fighter would likely benefit more from such skill than the ToB character... but the ToB character is still too versatile in comparison to the fighter. A fighter might be able to one hit KO a ton, but the ToB character's capabilities are still going to be relevant in more situations.

[Draz74]

and even the swordsage can be built to be little more magical than the monk.

The Swordsage can be built to be quite a bit less magical than the Monk, thank you very much.


Fighters, however, are (I believe) slightly more powerful at levels of high op-fu.

Depends how you define "powerful." What you say is correct, if you judge by "How high of numbers can I wrack up on the one thing I'm specializing in? (E.g. damage.)" But if adaptability to different circumstances factors into your definition of "power," then ToB classes will come out on top.

[shadow_archmagi]

But I am not convinced that a fighter, even an optimized one, can match a ToB character made with similar skill. Granted, the Fighter would likely benefit more from such skill than the ToB character... but the ToB character is still too versatile in comparison to the fighter. A fighter might be able to one hit KO a ton, but the ToB character's capabilities are still going to be relevant in more situations.



I believe the discussion runs like this

"Fighters cannot do very many things."
"Truely, that is why perhaps the Warblade is a better class; it is pretty easy to learn maneuvers."
"I made a fighter that can deal 19 times as much damage."
"I thought we were discussing versatility and ease of use rather than sheer damage output?"

[Akal Saris]

The ToB is my favorite 3.5 D&D book - I'd say it's well worth it. The 3 classes are all terrifically designed and have their own strong flavor, and the prestige classes are generally awesome as well. Lots of good feats even for non-ToB classes as well.

As for obsoleting older classes, meh. There's no rule saying you can't mix the two, especially given the multiclass feats in ToB. A Rogue 19/Swordsage 1 is good, and so is a Rogue 1/Swordsage 19. It all depends on what you want from a character.

A fighter, for example, is still a superior archer at most levels of play (1-16th almost certainly). A mounted fighter can pull off spirited charge from 1st or 2nd level, while a warblade must wait until 3rd or 6th level. A dungeoncrasher fighter is also a superior bull rusher, and a zhentarim sub fighter is a terrific intimidate-based character. If you want to make an AOO-based tripper, Ftr 4/Warblade 16 is probably better than Warblade 20 just because of the sheer number of feats necessary.

I don't see warblade as making fighter obsolete any more than the Knight makes fighter obsolete just because the Knight is a better tank than the fighter in most situations. There's more the fighter class can do than just tanking, after all.

[The Glyphstone]

I don't see warblade as making fighter obsolete any more than the Knight makes fighter obsolete just because the Knight is a better tank than the fighter in most situations. There's more the fighter class can do than just tanking, after all.

That's kinda cause the fighter can't really tank, at least not without non-core feats...aside from a reach weapon+Improved Trip+Combat Reflexes, there's nothing a Fighter can do to protect his party members. The Knight can obsolete the fighter at the Tanking role because he benefits equally from Reach+Trip+Reflexes, while also having multiple class features that aid him in such a role.

[Emmerask]

Yes it is a very nice book and certainly worth it.

The power level escalation mentioned by a few posters is really only significant if you run unoptimized games (ie fireball blaster wizard, healing cleric etc) then the tob classes will most likely destroy the balance of your games, in all other cases it levels the playing field, which is good.

What I really dislike: a prc for divine casters, a prc for arcane casters... where in the nine hells are the prcs for psionics? Both arcane and divine classes already have like a million prcs to chose from and in all honesty really don´t need any more toys :smallyuk:

Psionics on the other hand with its 12 or so prcs to choose from could have really benefited, one prc for the more caster oriented psys and one for the melee ones instead of jade phoenix and ruby knight and the book would have been awesome :smalltongue:

[DracoDei]

But yes, ToB is one of the best systems martial characters could hope for (barring archery, which makes Lycanthromancer a sad puppy).


A fighter, for example, is still a superior archer at most levels of play (1-16th almost certainly).

We fixed this. (Spoilered for borderline OT-ness)
Ranged
{table]Name|Author|Concept|Skill|Weapons|Who Qualifies
Iron Rain (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8103297#post8103297)|dspeyer (compiler)|Rapid Archery|Spot|Bows, Throwing Knives, Javelins|
Falcon's Eye (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8103296#post8103296)|dspeyer (compiler)|Precision Archery|Search|Bows, Crossbows, Rays|
Nightingale Feather (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8103306#post8103306)|dspeyer (compiler)|Mystic Archery|Spot|Bows, Slings, Shurukin|
Black Rain (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5471505#post5471505)|Demented One|Firearms|Spot|firearms, as well as the concussion blaster, death ray, firewand and wandgun|
Falling Star (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10707)|Fax|Deprecated archery|Spot|longbow, composite longbow, shortbow, composite shortbow, greatbow, and composite greatbow|
True Arrow (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7780236&postcount=379)|I_got_this_name|Deprecated archery|Spot|light and heavy crossbow, longbow, shortbow, and javelin|
[/table]
Also, someone more recently did a cross-bow focused discipline (which may be completely redundant with the above), and many of the other disciplines may include a lot of ranged attacks (I know Falling Anvil does...).

[Elfin]

I strongly recommend getting it; it did wonders for my campaign.
And even if you don't like the fluff, it's quite easy to change that.

[Lycanthromancer]

We fixed this. (Spoilered for borderline OT-ness)
Ranged
{table]Name|Author|Concept|Skill|Weapons|Who Qualifies
Iron Rain (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8103297#post8103297)|dspeyer (compiler)|Rapid Archery|Spot|Bows, Throwing Knives, Javelins|
Falcon's Eye (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8103296#post8103296)|dspeyer (compiler)|Precision Archery|Search|Bows, Crossbows, Rays|
Nightingale Feather (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8103306#post8103306)|dspeyer (compiler)|Mystic Archery|Spot|Bows, Slings, Shurukin|
Black Rain (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5471505#post5471505)|Demented One|Firearms|Spot|firearms, as well as the concussion blaster, death ray, firewand and wandgun|
Falling Star (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10707)|Fax|Deprecated archery|Spot|longbow, composite longbow, shortbow, composite shortbow, greatbow, and composite greatbow|
True Arrow (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7780236&postcount=379)|I_got_this_name|Deprecated archery|Spot|light and heavy crossbow, longbow, shortbow, and javelin|
[/table]
Also, someone more recently did a cross-bow focused discipline (which may be completely redundant with the above), and many of the other disciplines may include a lot of ranged attacks (I know Falling Anvil does...).
See Spot Run?

But those look nifty. I may have to point those out to my roommate, who wants to play a ToB character, but ALSO wants an archer.

Booyah.


A fighter, for example, is still a superior an inferior archer at most levels of play (1-16th almost certainly).Fixed that. It's good for a 2-3 level dip to get the prereqs for the better archery feats, and that's about it.

Really, archers are mostly pretty poor to begin with, and fighters are pretty bad at it. Sure, they have the feats, but they don't get the maneuverability needed to be an archer, nor do they get any kind of bonus damage (which, given DR and archery's nickel-and-dime strategy, is very very important), nor do they have any perception-based abilities or stealth, since archery is all about finding a foe and taking it out from afar without letting it close with you (with fighters having Wis as a dump-stat and no Spot/Listen/Hide/Move Silently capabilities, this makes it difficult for them to be proper archers).

Dip only, basically. Just like 95% of other fighter uses.

[Sliver]

It's good for a 2-3 level dip to get the prereqs for the better archery feats, and that's about it.

:smalleek::smallconfused:

A fighter, as a 3 level dip?!

[Lycanthromancer]

:smalleek::smallconfused:

A fighter, as a 3 level dip?!Sure. The one that has the 3rd feat. That blank space beside the number 3 in the Player's Handbook? That's not a level. That's a typo.

[Greenish]

A fighter, as a 3 level dip?!Skill Focus: Intimidate, woo!

[Amphetryon]

Sure. The one that has the 3rd feat. That blank space beside the number 3 in the Player's Handbook? That's not a level. That's a typo.
Silly me. I thought the typo happened at FIFTH level, where they accidentally moved the bonus feat to a level that already has a feat. :smallbiggrin:

[Sliver]

Sure. The one that has the 3rd feat. That blank space beside the number 3 in the Player's Handbook? That's not a level. That's a typo.

But... The article... It told me... Fighters have 9 dead levels... It promised to help, to fill those dead levels... No more feats... Interesting and new abilities, it promised...


Physical Prowess (Ex): Starting at 3rd level, a fighter gets a bonus to some aspect of his ability checks that makes him a better warrior. The fighter gains an additional bonus at 5th level and every two fighter levels thereafter (7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, 17th, and 19th). The bonus must be drawn from the following list.

Applied Force (Ex): A fighter can administer force to the weakest points of inanimate objects effectively, giving the character a +1 bonus on Strength checks to break or burst items (see page 165 of the Player's Handbook).
Designer's Note: At most, physical prowess can be abused by taking the same bonus nine times in a row. Having done so, however, the character will be a 19th-level fighter and should be rewarded for his devotion to a single class without multiclassing. If that means the character can easily bend bars or break doors, so be it. Such destructive force is their due.

Combat Bearing (Ex): A fighter can steady himself to fight in precarious situations, giving the character a +1 bonus on Dexterity checks to avoid falling when damaged while balancing or moving quickly across difficult surfaces (see Balance on page 67 of the Player's Handbook).

Stamina Reserve (Ex): A fighter can push his body more than normal, giving the character a +1 bonus on Constitution checks to continue running (see page 144 of the Player's Handbook) and to avoid nonlethal damage from a forced march (see page 164 of the Player's Handbook).

It lied. Those abilities suck. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061013a)

At least it's a funny article.


The monk is the only other core class, aside from the barbarian, that has no dead levels. Players always have something to look forward to with the monk, which boasts the most colorful and unique special abilities of all the character classes.

[Mikeavelli]

For bonus points, see here:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7623906

Suddenly instead of nine types of martial arts to blend together, you have about 50.
Themes range from the "why didn't Tome of Battle HAVE this" with the disciplines covering various approaches to archery, to something for firearms if you include that in your game, to my own contribution for humor campaigns... a discipline that draws on the primal power of comedy in the way of The Three Stooges and Looney Toons.

It's a little bit to look through this entire thread, but when you mentioned firearms, I immediately thought, "Does this include Gun Kata?"

[Sliver]

There is only one true firearm.

http://i650.photobucket.com/albums/uu224/abaridginay/chainsaw-launcher-weapon-rocket.jpg

[Myou]

It's the best single book in all 3.5. :smallsmile:

[Murdim]

At least it's a funny article.

The monk is the only other core class, aside from the barbarian, that has no dead levels. Players always have something to look forward to with the monk, which boasts the most colorful and unique special abilities of all the character classes.
There's no questioning anymore ; we all know WotC's dedicated butt monkey.

Which actually put us back on the main topic, since the Swordsage makes a much better fantasy monk than the Monk class in pretty much every domain. Unless you prefer a stronger "mind over matter" vibe, in which case Psychic Warrior is the way to go.

[DracoDei]

It's a little bit to look through this entire thread, but when you mentioned firearms, I immediately thought, "Does this include Gun Kata?"
Depending on how narrowly you define it, yes. That would be Black Rain (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5471505#post5471505) (or The Way of the Gear (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7758055#post7758055), which may have been cut from the project, since it doesn't really fit the setting).

If you mean "Equilibrium" specifically, then Age of Warriors wouldn't cover that, but I think I have seen two different PrCs on that theme.

[DragoonWraith]

There is a "Grammaton Cleric" class that was pretty good, as I recall. Kind of like a combination of Monk and Barbarian (Rage-like effect that was supposed to be basically "bullet time") but used Firearms...

[AslanCross]

Tome of Battle has made melee in my games fun. Melee characters can now do more than just swing their swords. They can get a tactical fix thanks to White Raven maneuvers, or extra damage thanks to...well, a lot of disciplines. There is some power creep since it's harder to screw up a martial adept build---say, a TWF Warblade or Swordsage is likely going to have a much easier time than a TWF straight Fighter.

That said, if the group agrees, it is a good addition.

EDIT: I never had ToB "overwrite" the Paladin, Monk and Fighter like I often hear suggested. The classes synergize fantastically, especially Fighter/Warblade.

[Merk]

ToB did wonders for my campaign, which was a low-magic campaign. By the end of the campaign, most remaining players either picked up genuine initiator levels or at least took martial study or martial stance.

[Sliver]

For some reason I can't get out some specific phrase out of my head...

Tomb of Battle.

[Lycanthromancer]

For some reason I can't get out some specific phrase out of my head...

Tomb of Battle.Tombs are what battles tend to lead to, funnily enough.

[Runestar]

I won't say that ToB is stronger than fighters (fighters and barbs still outdamage warblades), but they are more versatile as martial adepts tend to have more options than conventional melee, and more efficient use of the action economy. This in turn makes adepts more fun to play.

Just as a wizard can move, cast a standard action spell, a quickened spell and still respond with an abrupt jaunt (or some other immediate action), a martial adept can also move, boost, attack and counter. How dynamic is that? :smallcool:

[Hague]

ToB classes need mental attributes. Fighters don't. A fighter with 5 int will still get all his/her feats. A Warblade or Swordsage with terrible intelligence and wisdom scores are very suboptimal. Fighters are brutes, cunning brutes, but brutes nonetheless, while ToB classes need lots of extra bonuses to power their individual class features. Also, all martial classes are improved by ToB. Martial Study and Martial Stance feats can give a breath of fresh air to any fighter or paladin build. Even the smallest dips into these classes also greatly improve a core martial build too. Want your Fighter to be the "commander" style character? Pick up White Raven maneuvers and stances. Like being a hard core tank? Stone Dragon and so on.

[Greenish]

ToB classes need mental attributes.They benefit from them. There's a difference.
Fighters don't. A fighter with 5 int will still get all his/her feats.Except Combat Expertise chain or Combat Focus ones or anything else that requires those scores.

A Warblade or Swordsage with terrible intelligence and wisdom scores are very suboptimal.A warblade with poor int is still better than fighter. A swordsage will manage, too, by avoiding stuff that keys on wisdom (as in, Shadow Hand Strikes that offer saves).

Fighters are brutes, cunning brutes, but brutes nonetheless, while ToB classes need lots of extra bonuses to power their individual class features.…wut.

Also, all martial classes are improved by ToB. Martial Study and Martial Stance feats can give a breath of fresh air to any fighter or paladin build.Yes, you can make your fighter a bit more like a warblade by picking up gimped versions of it's class features as feats.
Even the smallest dips into these classes also greatly improve a core martial build too.Yeah, and the bigger the dip the better, for most cases.

[Gametime]

ToB classes need mental attributes. Fighters don't. A fighter with 5 int will still get all his/her feats. A Warblade or Swordsage with terrible intelligence and wisdom scores are very suboptimal. Fighters are brutes, cunning brutes, but brutes nonetheless, while ToB classes need lots of extra bonuses to power their individual class features. Also, all martial classes are improved by ToB. Martial Study and Martial Stance feats can give a breath of fresh air to any fighter or paladin build. Even the smallest dips into these classes also greatly improve a core martial build too. Want your Fighter to be the "commander" style character? Pick up White Raven maneuvers and stances. Like being a hard core tank? Stone Dragon and so on.

A martial adept with terrible mental scores will still get all of their maneuvers, which already put them well above Fighters in the class feature competition. Getting mental stats to boost damage or armor or saves or what-have-you was a pleasant way for WotC to encourage playing smart/wise/forceful melee characters instead of the Half-Ogre Half-Minotaur Half-Water Orc walking vegetables the traditional melee classes resort to to remain competitive.

[The-Mage-King]

Of COURSE!

ToB is entirely worth it! Hell, half of my characters have at least some ToB in their build!

[Thrice Dead Cat]

I'm a big fan of ToB, as it works for just about everyone, including fighters. Sure, you could easily replace the Paladin, Monk, and Fighter with the Crusader, Swordsage, and Warblade, but you can get some pretty sweet stuffs by delaying your maneuvers a little bit with Monk 2, Fighter 2, or Paladin 2 before hitting up the ToB classes.

That and I've been meaning to build a Dungeoncrasher with Stone Dragon.