Just got Tome of Battle, need some help

[Welknair]

Hey, I just got ToB and have been leafing through it. I really like what I'm seeing. Melee characters can actually be fun to play! However, I have a few... problems.

I've read several articles about problems and fixes and the like, as such I will post what I am considering here.

1. Allow the sword sage to regain three maneuvers as a full round action, instead of just one.

2. State that Adaptive style does not cause you to regain all lost maneuvers, only swap out remaining ones.

3. Removes the 3 feat limit of Martial Study

4. Possibly saying that the Warblades Adaptability ability for qualifying for fighter-only feats (Weapon Spec, etc.) only applies if the character has at least one fighter level. See below.


Oh, and looking at prestige classes, I was dismayed at a lack of variety. I was hoping to see one with both a sneak attack and maneuver progression for a swordsage/rogue...
That reminds me. Vaunred wouldn't have qualified for Master of Nine at 8th level! The example of a Master of Nine is Vaunred, a 7th level swordsage/3rd level Master of Nine. Master of Nine requires 5 feats. Let's do a bit of counting, shall we? Human, 1, 3, and 6 are the only feats he gets before getting MoN. I count four. In his statblock, the last of the prereq feats occupies his 9th level feat slot. The one he got after taking the class. This irks me greatly.


As for implications on my game, this would set the Sublime Way as the higher form of martial study, with fighters being to Warblades what Warriors are to Fighters (But, you know, where fighters actually have some idea what they're doing). And thanks to Martial Study being a Fighter Bonus Feat, a Fighter can easily use a few of his excess feats (When making a fighter, I never know what to spend the feats on after the basics...) on useful maneuvers. Also, I think that any player looking to make a melee character would inevitably take a level of Warblade before going for Fighter. D12 for a level, the ability to switch around your specializations, and a quick recovery technique for the maneuvers you get from Martial Study? HELL YES. However, I cannot decide whether this a good or bad thing. I understand that the Fighter has been underpowered for a long time, but I don't want it to be completely replaced by the Warblade. Do you think using the clause that the Warblades Adaptability ability for qualifying for fighter-only feats only works if the character has at least one fighter level would balance them a bit? Because as it is currently, a Warblade has everything a Fighter does, and the ability to go about it in an awesome way while dealing more damage.

Long rant. Thoughts?

[The Glyphstone]

I'm not sure the Weapon Adaptability nerf is necessary, and it'd be almost redundant anyways. Any Warblade who's not looking to get the lvl20 capstone will probably dip 2 levels of Fighter regardless, for 2 bonus feats that aren't restricted to the lame Warblade bonus list and only losing 1 initiator level and a few HP in the process.

[Akal Saris]

1. Sure, why not?

2. Only if you do 1.

3. Sure, who the hell would take it more than 3 times instead of entering the class?

4. Sure, 1 level of fighter early on is a decent choice for a warblade.

PrCs: I agree, we need a swordsage/rogue! But take a look at the homebrew stuff people have done for the ToB, some of it is excellent!

Warblade vs Fighter:
Even in core a wizard has just about everything a sorcerer does, only he does it sooner, with a more important casting stat, without metamagic restrictions preventing quicken spell, and with bonus feats as well. So warblade outshining fighter isn't even so bad in comparison. Besides, any warblade build would do well from 2 levels of fighter, just like any fighter build would do well with 1-2 levels of warblade. If it concerns you, then the easy solutions might be to give fighters a maneuver or stance every odd level, and to boost their HD to a d12 as well.

[SurlySeraph]

1. Makes Adaptive Style less of a mandatory feat tax for Swordsages, so sure.
2. No. Adaptive Style isn't too powerful, there's not much point to this.
3. Sure.
4. No.

Vaunred could be serving an Elder Evil or have sold his soul to a demon, those give you free feats. :smalltongue: Yeah, WotC makes a lot of mistakes in sample characters but that's a pretty egregious one.

Fighter is really only useful for 2-4 levels without pretty specific builds, I have no problem with Warblade making them obsolete.

[Sucrose]

Frankly, the adaptability in feats is pretty much just gravy. It would take something a bit more substantial to let Fighters be on an even keel with Warblades. Even if you gave Fighters the expanded skills/level and skill list of Warblades, the latter would still be better, but it'd be a little closer, in my view. I'd consider adapting the fighter to the Martial Fighter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133632); if it's not on an even keel with Warblades, it's at least extremely close.

And Warblades don't have EVERYTHING a fighter does. They lack most ranged options, and heavy armor proficiency. They're just by far superior hand-to-hand combatants, and have ways of making up for the deficiencies of their chassis that a fighter lacks.

Many examples of PrCs in 3.5 have issues, but I agree that the PrC section is one of the book's weaker areas, and there's never really an excuse for miserable builds like that.

Swordsage maneuver recovery is indeed ridiculously painful. It seems to me that Adaptive Style is almost a feat tax for them. I don't really see why you feel the need to restrict that feat; if anything, I'd be tempted to give the original version as a bonus feat to Swordsages. After all, Warblades can recover their maneuvers while attacking, and Crusaders don't even need to do that. Even one full-round-action is very painful.

[Boci]

1. Allow the sword sage to regain three maneuvers as a full round action, instead of just one.

I'd just give the swordsages adaptive style as a bonus feat.


2. State that Adaptive style does not cause you to regain all lost maneuvers, only swap out remaining ones.

Its not worth it this way (its barely worth it when it allows you regain all used maneuvers). You are doing nothing for 1 round in combat, which is a big price.


3. Removes the 3 feat limit of Martial Study

Can't hurt.


4. Possibly saying that the Warblades Adaptability ability for qualifying for fighter-only feats (Weapon Spec, etc.) only applies if the character has at least one fighter level. See below.

Seems unneccisary.

[Welknair]

Four is henceforth off the table.

Two was my personal interpretation. I don't think the feat was meant to be a one stop recovery and swap out of all maneuvers for any martial class.

[Eldariel]

1. Makes Adaptive Style less of a mandatory feat tax for Swordsages, so sure.
2. No. Adaptive Style isn't too powerful, there's not much point to this.

I suggest going the extra mile and making Adaptive Style a bonus feat and the default recovery for Swordsages. It's still weaker than the other Adepts' method since it takes a full-round action (entire turn of doing nothing) while the others are either using maneuvers non-stop or full attacking while recovering.

But it makes sense; Swordsages meditate so being able to switch out the whole maneuver set in the process seems sensible. And Swordsages' shtick is knowing more maneuvers than the others (at the cost of medium BAB and worse recovery); the only real way to make use of that is being able to switch them. So Adaptive Style kinda makes perfect sense on a Swordsage and would help them with their atrocious recovery. Overall, I think the two are a match made in heaven and I'd suggest embracing rather than breaking the perfection.

[Boci]

Four is henceforth off the table.

Two was my personal interpretation. I don't think the feat was meant to be a one stop recovery and swap out of all maneuvers for any martial class.

By RAW I believe it does, since it mentions in the normal section that it would otherwise take 5 minutes (which does allow you to recover spent maneuvers,) Besides, its useability is more important than the intented function.

[AslanCross]

1. Allow the sword sage to regain three maneuvers as a full round action, instead of just one.

2. State that Adaptive style does not cause you to regain all lost maneuvers, only swap out remaining ones.

Well, Adaptive Style was supposed to be the feat that all Swordsages take to get around their sluggish maneuvery recovery. I do think the point of the Swordsage is that you have a whole bunch of esoteric tricks that you can use, as opposed to the far more limited readied maneuvers that the others have. My understanding is that the Swordsage has what he needs, and he can use it to quickly dispatch a target quickly without having to remain in combat for the long haul (which the Warblade and Crusader are for).



3. Removes the 3 feat limit of Martial Study

Considering that a character gets seven feats from Lv 1 to 20, I'm not really sure how this changes anything, especially since a character who picks up Martial study probably wants to pick up Martial stance too.



Oh, and looking at prestige classes, I was dismayed at a lack of variety. I was hoping to see one with both a sneak attack and maneuver progression for a swordsage/rogue...

Same here; the large amount of flatfooted/flanking maneuvers just screams for one. I wish the Shadow Sun Ninja had that at least. You will have to admit that the few PrCs they have are mostly pretty good. RKV comes out on top; JPM is there just for being a caster. Third is probably Bloodstorm Blade, because it makes throwing builds viable without having to go through the intense feat taxes that classes like Master Thrower and Whisperknife get.



That reminds me. Vaunred wouldn't have qualified for Master of Nine at 8th level! The example of a Master of Nine is Vaunred, a 7th level swordsage/3rd level Master of Nine. Master of Nine requires 5 feats. Let's do a bit of counting, shall we? Human, 1, 3, and 6 are the only feats he gets before getting MoN. I count four. In his statblock, the last of the prereq feats occupies his 9th level feat slot. The one he got after taking the class. This irks me greatly.

WOTC is notorious for having badly-edited sample PrC characters.



As for implications on my game, this would set the Sublime Way as the higher form of martial study, with fighters being to Warblades what Warriors are to Fighters (But, you know, where fighters actually have some idea what they're doing). And thanks to Martial Study being a Fighter Bonus Feat, a Fighter can easily use a few of his excess feats (When making a fighter, I never know what to spend the feats on after the basics...) on useful maneuvers. Also, I think that any player looking to make a melee character would inevitably take a level of Warblade before going for Fighter. D12 for a level, the ability to switch around your specializations, and a quick recovery technique for the maneuvers you get from Martial Study? HELL YES. However, I cannot decide whether this a good or bad thing. I understand that the Fighter has been underpowered for a long time, but I don't want it to be completely replaced by the Warblade. Do you think using the clause that the Warblades Adaptability ability for qualifying for fighter-only feats only works if the character has at least one fighter level would balance them a bit? Because as it is currently, a Warblade has everything a Fighter does, and the ability to go about it in an awesome way while dealing more damage.

In my games, whether I play or DM, I see the warrior as the guy who has gone through Basic Training, the fighter as the guy who has a combat specialization (hence his multiple bonus feats) and the warblade as a relatively rare, culturally-based fighter who sacrifices some of his learning in traditional martial doctrine for something more esoteric but more versatile, hence his Weapon Aptitude ability and varying maneuvers. Characters from certain cultures will tend to use particular styles (A character from the primarily military nation of Karrnath in Eberron will tend towards, but is not restricted to, Iron Heart and White Raven maneuvers; the more finesse-based Aundarians might use Diamond Mind instead, fighting with a rapier; Shifters like the feel of TWF and a more wild fighting style, so they tend to specialize in Tiger Claw).

I never liked completely overwriting the core classes with ToB. Warblade supplements fighter quite well and also bolsters the TWF Ranger; Swordsage and Monk can benefit from each other. It's only Paladin and Crusader that tend to be redundant.


I'm not sure the Weapon Adaptability nerf is necessary, and it'd be almost redundant anyways. Any Warblade who's not looking to get the lvl20 capstone will probably dip 2 levels of Fighter regardless, for 2 bonus feats that aren't restricted to the lame Warblade bonus list and only losing 1 initiator level and a few HP in the process.

Agreed. I think this one is unnecessary. A fighter 2-dip is usually my standard build procedure when making a Warblade.

[Tael]

None of these are actually needed, and that is a pointless nerf to adaptive style. I would not use those "fixes".

[Claudius Maximus]

Wow. I thought Adaptive Style was the actual Swordsage recovery mechanic.

I'm just surprised I made such a huge mistake.

[Tael]

Wow. I thought Adaptive Style was the actual Swordsage recovery mechanic.

I'm just surprised I made such a huge mistake.

Do yourself a favor. Keep remembering that way. Adaptive Style is basically a feat tax for Swordsages.

[Welknair]

1. Meant to accommodate slow recovery. Current thoughts: Possibly unneeded as the class may have been meant to deal with things quickly

2. My interpretation. I doubt that Adaptive style was meant to be used in that way.

3. For fighters using bonus feats. But yeah, they should just multiclass.

4. Meant to differentiate the two and make Fighter useful for something. Ditched that idea. I'll just use the Martial Fighter given. Thanks for that.

[Boci]

2. My interpretation. I doubt that Adaptive style was meant to be used in that way.

But your interpretations makes it unusuable. I'm paying 1 feat and 1 round in combat to swap maneuvers, but maneuvers are not that situational enough for it to be worth it. If it was a swift action I would consider it, but if its a full round action I wouldn't touch it with an 11ft pole.

[AslanCross]

I really wish they had issued a proper errata for ToB, as that might have clarified the thornier issues coming out of the book. Adaptive Style is one of them; White Raven Tactics and Firesnake too, as well as the vague rules on PrC martial progression and whether other, non-ToB PrCs also stack for Initiator levles.

Also weird how Sapphire Nightmare Blade makes the target flat-footed, but none of its stronger versions do.

Alas, someone got bored and decided to C/P the Complete Mage errata instead.

[HunterOfJello]

Swordsages are considered by many people to be heavily feat taxed as it is, even though they are an excellent base class. The normal Swordsage ends up taking Adaptive Style, Weapon Finesse, Shadow Blade and either Two-Weapon Fighting or an Exotic Weapon Proficiency for the Spiked Chain or Elven Courtblade.

Because of this, I've given Adaptive Style for free to Swordsages in my campaigns and have seen little problem with it. I think spending a Full Round Action is enough of a penalty for refreshing and changing maneuvers. Many Warblades and Crusaders end up taking the feat to increase their versatility in combat anyway, so the feat would still be available to them.

[Welknair]

But your interpretations makes it unusuable. I'm paying 1 feat and 1 round in combat to swap maneuvers, but maneuvers are not that situational enough for it to be worth it. If it was a swift action I would consider it, but if its a full round action I wouldn't touch it with an 11ft pole.

So what if we made it a swift action to compensate? I think that that's more in line with the original concept of the feat (As opposed to being a feat tax for sword sage and used more for recovery than adaptability).

[Escheton]

Swordsage maneuvers are more powerfull/usefull then the the fightertype maneuvers. They are not meant to be used as often.
The feat is there so that in case of emergency you can do so anyways.
Your fix indicates that you are simply not in for playing the class as intended and want to merge the classes. Play a gish instead.

[Boci]

So what if we made it a swift action to compensate? I think that that's more in line with the original concept of the feat (As opposed to being a feat tax for sword sage and used more for recovery than adaptability).

Yeah, that sounds good for a feat, but I still think swordsages are going to suffer without being able to recover all their maneuvers (3 maneuvers is only 1.5 rounds worth). Also, it means martial adepts will have to spend 5 minutes between fights recovering maneuvers, which could annoy the party.

[Welknair]

It says that all maneuvers are regained at the end of an encounter.

As for the need for recovery, there's a feat for that. Sudden Recovery is meant for those emergency situations.

[Boci]

It says that all maneuvers are regained at the end of an encounter.

I'm pretty sure it still takes 5 minutes.


As for the need for recovery, there's a feat for that. Sudden Recovery is meant for those emergency situations.

And is a pretty weak feat, which doesn't help you if you're only halfway through combat.

[Welknair]

I'm pretty sure it still takes 5 minutes.

"Even a few moments out of combat is sufficient to refresh all maneuvers expended in the previous battle. ...assume that if a character makes no attacks of any kind, initiates no new maneuvers, and is not targeted by any enemy attacks for 1 full minutes, he can recover all expended maneuvers."

[Boci]

"Even a few moments out of combat is sufficient to refresh all maneuvers expended in the previous battle. ...assume that if a character makes no attacks of any kind, initiates no new maneuvers, and is not targeted by any enemy attacks for 1 full minutes, he can recover all expended maneuvers."

Okay thats not as bad, but it could still annoy a mage is they have to wait one minute before pressing on, since that could be easting into their 1 round/level and 1 minute / level buffs.

[Welknair]

I believe that the 1 minutes limit is for nitpickers. It essentially means that at the end of an encounter they all recover. Unless you're doing back-to-back encounters or a dense dungeon crawl, it shouldn't be a problem.

What if we made the recovery feat once per encounter?

[Claudius Maximus]

I'm sure it's far more inconvenient for the swordsage to wait 9 entire hours for the mage.

[Thrawn183]

A thought to consider on the warblade being a higher level than a fighter, like a fighter is to a warrior: the ToB multiclassing rules are possibly the most elegant part of 3.5. I would suggest looking at a fighter/warblade multiclass as an amalgamation of the two, rather than the warblade being the equivalent to a PrC.

[Boci]

I believe that the 1 minutes limit is for nitpickers. It essentially means that at the end of an encounter they all recover.

That's a good interpretations.


Unless you're doing back-to-back encounters or a dense dungeon crawl, it shouldn't be a problem.

Well, you're the one who knows what kind of encounters your PCs will meet.


What if we made the recovery feat once per encounter?

Decent feat since you can use your best maneuver twice per encounter, but still not much help if you're out of maneuvers and combat won't be other soon.


I'm sure it's far more inconvenient for the swordsage to wait 9 entire hours for the mage.

Doesn't cost the swordsage anything though.

[Welknair]

That's a good interpretations.
Decent feat since you can use your best maneuver twice per encounter, but still not much help if you're out of maneuvers and combat won't be other soon.

So... All maneuvers once per day? I think that's more like it.

[Boci]

So... All maneuvers once per day? I think that's more like it.

As a swift action? That's certainly worth taking. Good idea, I'm tempted to steal that.

[Welknair]

Yep. Sounds like we have a winner! So conclusion:

1. Normal recovery method for Swordsage
2. Adaptive Style only allows the replacement of remaining maneuvers. Takes a swift action. Sudden Recovery beefed up to accommodate; now all maneuvers once per day as a swift action. Swordsages can take this for emergency cases if need be.
3. No 3 limit, but really isn't required. Doesn't hurt however. Why was the limit there to begin with?
4.Adaptability will remain unchanged, but Fighters will be using the Martial Fighter stats, which should make them worth playing.

Thanks for all the help!

[Boci]

2. Adaptive Style only allows the replacement of remaining maneuvers.

But only takes a swift action right?

[Welknair]

Oh, yes. One sec... editing.

[T.G. Oskar]

Hey, I just got ToB and have been leafing through it. I really like what I'm seeing. Melee characters can actually be fun to play! However, I have a few... problems.

I've read several articles about problems and fixes and the like, as such I will post what I am considering here.

1. Allow the sword sage to regain three maneuvers as a full round action, instead of just one.

Anything, even free Adaptive Style, is better than one maneuver recovered as a full-round action. Aside from, of course, not recovering the maneuver. So just make them have Adaptive Style from level 1, since it's really their "Natural Spell" feat tax; they always get it because of what it does.


2. State that Adaptive style does not cause you to regain all lost maneuvers, only swap out remaining ones.

Agree with other posters; it's an unnecessary feat, and otherwise it wouldn't see much use. In fact, the only other group that could make some use out of it (non-adepts) can't use it. So ignore this "fix".


3. Removes the 3 feat limit of Martial Study

Feasible. After all, keeping it to 3 feats seems a bit silly. I'd make Martial Study treat you as if you had an initiator level equal to your actual initiator level + the number of Martial Study/Martial Stance feats but limited to your character level (thus, a non-adept with three maneuvers gained through feats would have an initiator level equal to half its character level +3, meaning they could get some other maneuvers). However, make the benefits exclusive; either the limit is removed but the feat works otherwise as intended, or limit the access to Martial Study by 3 but increase the individual's IL by one each time they get the feat (to a limit of their character level).


4. Possibly saying that the Warblades Adaptability ability for qualifying for fighter-only feats (Weapon Spec, etc.) only applies if the character has at least one fighter level. See below.

No. Just, no. Make it even better; replace the Warblade feat list for the Fighter feat list plus the unique choices within the list. Dipping into Fighter is still reasonable, since you'd still get the feats faster, but that way you'd be capable of using your feat choices better (though you can already get Ironheart Aura and Stormguard Warrior through the bonus feats anyways, so it's mostly to provide new opportunities).


Oh, and looking at prestige classes, I was dismayed at a lack of variety. I was hoping to see one with both a sneak attack and maneuver progression for a swordsage/rogue...

There's quite a lot of homebrew around here, so there's no lack of choices. Closest thing theoretically should be Shadow Sun Ninja but that's to mingle Monk/Ninja and Swordsage together. Rogues could get in but they'd lose Sneak Attack (gaining Monk AC and other stuff instead).


As for implications on my game, this would set the Sublime Way as the higher form of martial study, with fighters being to Warblades what Warriors are to Fighters (But, you know, where fighters actually have some idea what they're doing). And thanks to Martial Study being a Fighter Bonus Feat, a Fighter can easily use a few of his excess feats (When making a fighter, I never know what to spend the feats on after the basics...) on useful maneuvers. Also, I think that any player looking to make a melee character would inevitably take a level of Warblade before going for Fighter. D12 for a level, the ability to switch around your specializations, and a quick recovery technique for the maneuvers you get from Martial Study? HELL YES. However, I cannot decide whether this a good or bad thing. I understand that the Fighter has been underpowered for a long time, but I don't want it to be completely replaced by the Warblade. Do you think using the clause that the Warblades Adaptability ability for qualifying for fighter-only feats only works if the character has at least one fighter level would balance them a bit? Because as it is currently, a Warblade has everything a Fighter does, and the ability to go about it in an awesome way while dealing more damage.

Problem lies in that, unlike (IMO at least) the Paladin and the Monk, the Fighter really has no unique flavor of its own. The Swordsage on its unarmed variant is often dealt with as a replacement of the Monk, but the class has some stuff of its own if you open all the books. There's a few things that the Monk has that the Swordsage might not get, but in general it's very hard to consider that the Monk will ever be stronger than the Unarmed Swordsage (still, there's some of us guys who have a soft spot for the Monk, and then there are those who seek solace in Psionics and the almighty Tashalatora).

Much more different is, for example, the contrast between the Crusader and the Paladin, with the latter having even more support (in terms of unique spells, unique weapons, unique ACFs, variety of special mounts, support through divine feats) that make it different from the Crusader in play. Very hardly you'll get a better mounted warrior than a Paladin, or a better terrain controller than a Crusader, but the Crusader's tactics don't work well within a mount and the Paladin doesn't have (but CAN get) Thicket of Blades and enough feats to support a build like it. I definitely disregard the idea of the Crusader as the stealth-fix for the Paladin, since I love most (if not all) of the options Pallies get (spellcasting, divine feats and ways to replace the special mount mostly). But, there'll be people who insist that the Crusader can perfectly replace a Paladin...

Then you get the Warblade and the Fighter, and there's little way to deal with it. The Warblade gains class features, and it can do more with starter feats than what the Fighter can do with entire feat chains. Most of the Fighter ACFs replace feats on bad levels (usually the first or second feat, though it hurts a tad more when it's the second) and usually the best form of Fighter is a Dungeon Crasher which can do slightly more than the base Fighter. The Warblade gets more HP, almost the same choice of weapons (Fighter gets all martial ranged weapons), more skill points (4 + Int) and better skill list (adding stuff like Listen and Spot amongst others), synergy with Int (more skill points AND better Reflex, better chances of confirming a critical threat, more damage when flanking and other similar options), not to mention the maneuvers and stances. To have a Fighter stand different from the Warblade, the Fighter has to reinvent the philosophy of combat different from the Warblade, and sadly the Warblade tends to stomp on any attempt because of just how well-done it was (compared to, say, Truenamer which was done roughly around the same time). Weapon Aptitude is just the tip of the iceberg, since it takes the only thing in which the Fighter could specialize, the devs thinking that Weapon Specialization and the Weapon Focus line was enough "class features" for the Fighter (being the Fighter the only class that could take them). Melee/Ranged Weapon Mastery and Weapon Supremacy are cool, but largely not enough to justify taking a Fighter; much less that PLUS Dungeon Crasher, arguably the only ACF that can really boost the power of a Fighter.

If you're gonna boost the Fighter, arguably you'll have to take it to homebrew or downgrade the Fighter into the place of the Warrior, since even the Adept has better class features. But there are ways to fight that dilemma; while one of them is sucking up and accepting the Warblade IS a stealth fix to the Fighter (but that would lend credency to the fact the Swordsage and the Crusader may also be stealth-fixes to the Monk, the Ninja and the Paladin), the other is searching what part of homebrew Fighter options and remakes fits the conception of a Fighter much better. Technically, the Warblade roughly replaces the Barbarian in ability but not in sheer power or cool tricks (Spirit Lion Totem being the most abused); the fact that no one claims the Warblade as a replacement of the Barbarian (Tiger Claw, anyone?) shows something happens with the Barb that the Fighter doesn't get. Work with that, and you may rescue the Fighter from anonymity.

But nerfing Weapon Aptitude is not the best choice, since you'll rarely use the stacking rules between Fighter and Warblade (VERY rarely).

[Welknair]

Thank you for the feedback, but I prefer what Boci and I decided on.

Also, everything that you just has already been discussed.