Tome of Balanced or Tome of Broken?

[CycloneJoker]

Why would people say ToB is busted, outside Iron Heart Surge and the d2 Crusader (which I do not know how it gets the infinite damage). A lot of books have MANY more broken things, so why would it be banned? Is it just misunderstanding like Incarnum?

Also, I'd like to ask the same thing about Psionics.

[DeckOneBell]

Mostly the reasons are that even an badly played ToB class is still pretty strongly a T3, the ToB classes tend to be flat upgrades from core classes (compare the warblade to the fighter) and... that's all I've got.

A poorly optimized blaster wizard is probably worse than a poorly optimized warblade or swordsage, in my opinion, at least until higher levels like 15 where wizards just get silly.

But most of the people on these boards actually like ToB a lot, so.

[AslanCross]

At low levels, ToB does give the impression of making melee characters so much stronger than core martial characters, as they can go all day with maneuvers.

At around Lv 6-10, they remain in line with casters. After that they quickly fall behind.

Since many games start at very low levels, the tendency is to generalize that ToB is that broken.

Also, it might just be the aesthetics of it, which is debatable, but not the topic of this thread.

[Flickerdart]

More like Tome of Better (than the core melee classes). ToB brings melee up to a tier where it can actually do something shiny. It's not balanced with Monks or Fighters, but it's right at home among Beguilers or Bards. XPH is similar but the other way - it's by and large less powerful than Vancian casters, barring cheese on both sides.

However, while the three Tome of Battle classes are largely equal in power (due to being very similar) psionic classes range from stupidly broken (one reading of Erudite) to pretty well balanced (Adept and Psychic Warrior) to downright terribad (Soulknife).

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

My group doesnt use Tome of Battle... not because we think it is broken (how can it be compared to a level 20 wizard or cleric?) but because we have played D&D for a long, long time... and we are alright with casters being more powerful. We feel that we can come up with any character concept we really need with the classes that are already there.

We arent hating on ToB... we just dont need it.

[SuperFish]

(which I do not know how it gets the infinite damage).

There's two parts to the Infinite Damage Crusader.

One is a feat that lets you reroll any damage die that comes up as a 1.

Another is the stance Aura of Chaos that lets you reroll any damage die that shows the maximum.

By using a weapon that does 1d2 damage, every die you roll is rerolled and added to your damage, and rerolled again, and again, ad infinium.

As for the original question, I think it's just another case of melee can't have nice things.

[Ozreth]

I never understand all of this "broken" stuff. The PC's and the DM are all working together to get through an adventure and the enemies you fight don't have real feeling to be hurt when PC's get to use stuff out of these "broken" books.

The party is a team so if one PC is a bit stronger than the rest it only helps the team.

I feel like the amount of talking about "broken" and "unbalanced" that goes on here is more suitable for games that focus on PVP (wargames, mmorpg's etc).

Maybe I'm just playing the wrong edition of Dungeons and Dragons : p

[CycloneJoker]

More like Tome of Better (than the core melee classes). ToB brings melee up to a tier where it can actually do something shiny. It's not balanced with Monks or Fighters, but it's right at home among Beguilers or Bards. XPH is similar but the other way - it's by and large less powerful than Vancian casters, barring cheese on both sides.

However, while the three Tome of Battle classes are largely equal in power (due to being very similar) psionic classes range from stupidly broken (one reading of Erudite) to pretty well balanced (Adept and Psychic Warrior) to downright terribad (Soulknife).
Yeah, Erudites are broken, but it I am getting you right, fighters just aren't allowed to be good?

There's two parts to the Infinite Damage Crusader.

One is a feat that lets you reroll any damage die that comes up as a 1.

Another is the stance Aura of Chaos that lets you reroll any damage die that shows the maximum.

By using a weapon that does 1d2 damage, every die you roll is rerolled and added to your damage, and rerolled again, and again, ad infinium.

As for the original question, I think it's just another case of melee can't have nice things.

As I was guessing. Nothing else arguably broken in ToB?

[AslanCross]

As I was guessing. Nothing else arguably broken in ToB?

White Raven Tactics and Iron Heart Surge, but those all come from questionable interpretations of ambiguous wording.

[EvilJoe15]

Broken as in too good, or broken as in not properly written?

The former: White Raven Tactics. You, or one of you allies get's another turn. Good by action economy. Compared to the Celerity line, not that bad.

The latter: Iron Heart Surge. It allows stupid things like ending the sun, and other nonsense. It's just badly worded.

[Blackfang108]

Is it just misunderstanding like Incarnum?

I'd answer, but you already did so in your post.

This is exactly it. Misunderstanding, followed by the lack of care to correct that misunderstanding.

[CycloneJoker]

White Raven Tactics and Iron Heart Surge, but those all come from questionable interpretations of ambiguous wording.


Broken as in too good, or broken as in not properly written?

The former: White Raven Tactics. You, or one of you allies get's another turn. Good by action economy. Compared to the Celerity line, not that bad.

The latter: Iron Heart Surge. It allows stupid things like ending the sun, and other nonsense. It's just badly worded.

I covered Surge, but White Raven is busted? Never really looked at it. Anything else that would justify a ban?

[Blackfang108]

I covered Surge, but White Raven is busted? Never really looked at it. Anything else that would justify a ban?

Honestly, even those two don't really justify a ban.

Well, WRT maybe can be verboten, assuming Celerity and similar "action economy" spells are taken off the table as well, but a sane DMs ruling on IHS makes it less silly and more "useful, but not broken"

[JaronK]

Tome of Battle classes have a much smaller optimization curve than many other classes, so in low optimization groups ToB classes look very powerful. Additionally, ToB classes are quite strong in the first 5 levels, when people aren't full attacking yet (usually), and those are the most commonly played levels.

As such, for a very large number of groups and campaigns, ToB classes look overpowered. If they played to higher levels or tried actually optimizing a bit, they'd find this was not the case.

JaronK

[AslanCross]

Honestly, even those two don't really justify a ban.


I never banned them myself (I don't really think they're broken), but they're often touted to be broken.

I think the reason WRT gets cheesed out is via Ruby Knight Vindicator.

[sonofzeal]

Also, ToB classes are pretty heavily front-loaded. In the lvl 1-3 range, they overwhelmingly shine compared to more conventional alternatives. That gap actually narrows somewhat in the mid levels, if the builds are both decent, but at lvl 1 it can be pretty significant.

[CycloneJoker]

Honestly, even those two don't really justify a ban.

Well, WRT maybe can be verboten, assuming Celerity and similar "action economy" spells are taken off the table as well, but a sane DMs ruling on IHS makes it less silly and more "useful, but not broken"


I never banned them myself (I don't really think they're broken), but they're often touted to be broken.

I think the reason WRT gets cheesed out is via Ruby Knight Vindicator.

Worded poorly. Meant that someone could use to justify a ban.


Tome of Battle classes have a much smaller optimization curve than many other classes, so in low optimization groups ToB classes look very powerful. Additionally, ToB classes are quite strong in the first 5 levels, when people aren't full attacking yet (usually), and those are the most commonly played levels.

As such, for a very large number of groups and campaigns, ToB classes look overpowered. If they played to higher levels or tried actually optimizing a bit, they'd find this was not the case.

JaronK

Makes sense.


Also, ToB classes are pretty heavily front-loaded. In the lvl 1-3 range, they overwhelmingly shine compared to more conventional alternatives. That gap actually narrows somewhat in the mid levels, if the builds are both decent, but at lvl 1 it can be pretty significant.

But don't Incarnate, DFA, and maybe Totemist do the same at low levels?

[AslanCross]

Also, ToB classes are pretty heavily front-loaded. In the lvl 1-3 range, they overwhelmingly shine compared to more conventional alternatives. That gap actually narrows somewhat in the mid levels, if the builds are both decent, but at lvl 1 it can be pretty significant.

As a concrete example:
Lv 1 core-only Human Fighter takes Power Attack, Weapon Focus (Greatsword), and Toughness.
His only way of dealing extra damage is Power Attack, and at most he can get +2 damage at the cost of a -1 attack penalty. Even if he gets Armor Spikes, he can't do more than one attack unless he wants to suck up the TWF penalty.

Compare and contrast with a Lv 1 Human Warblade who takes Power Attack and Weapon Focus (Greatsword). He gets no Toughness, but has d12 HD and as such gets an extra 2 base HP.
He still has the same -1 attack/+2 damage trick, but he also picks Wolf Fang Strike, Steel Wind, and Sapphire Nightmare Blade. His stance is Punishing Stance.
Assume he also has Armor Spikes.

He can: Attack both enemies with his greatsword for 3d6+Strength+2 damage, attack one enemy for 4d6+Strength damage if he succeeds a Concentration check (plus the enemy is flat-footed), or attack with his greatsword and armor spikes, each getting +1d6 damage, and bypass the TWF penalty thanks to Wolf Fang Strike, which imposes its own penalties.

There definitely is a clear difference at Lv 1, though when the fighter gets Shock Trooper+Leap Attack, the damage gap is gone. The warblade still gets more tricks, however.

[Boci]

There's also the Ruby Knight Vindicator. Whilst not broken by default, it is significantly more powerful than the other PrC in the book.

[JaronK]

As the optimization goes up of course the ToB classes look less scary by comparison... consider a Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 1 with, I dunno, Power Attack I suppose. As soon as he rages everyone dies. That's pretty darn good. Add 5 levels and the crazed Barbarian with Shock Trooper and Leap Attack is doing far more damage and is far scarier than a level 6 ToB class. Then again, the ToB guys have a lot more flexibility.

JaronK

[Hanuman]

People think ToB is broken because they believe core is balanced.

[AtomicKitKat]

Might be a similar reason to banning Psionics. Having to learn a new sub-system and all that. Sort of like if you're already well-versed in HTML, then having to learn Java, then CSS, and then Flash as well, just to keep up. A DM who had to do all that wouldn't want to have to memorise the manoevre and psionics systems on top of the regular rules.:smalltongue:

[Blackfang108]

But don't Incarnate, DFA, and maybe Totemist do the same at low levels?

Ah, but recall: those classes are Magical(tm) and therefore can be as front-loaded and awesome as they want to be.

[sonofzeal]

But don't Incarnate, DFA, and maybe Totemist do the same at low levels?
DFA is only really front-loaded if you think Entangling Exhalation is a 1st lvl class feature. Incarnate and Totemist I have less experience with, but they don't really have binds at that level and Incarnate needs all his soulmelds just to make up for his lackluster chassis and find some way to contribute.

[CycloneJoker]

As the optimization goes up of course the ToB classes look less scary by comparison... consider a Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 1 with, I dunno, Power Attack I suppose. As soon as he rages everyone dies. That's pretty darn good. Add 5 levels and the crazed Barbarian with Shock Trooper and Leap Attack is doing far more damage and is far scarier than a level 6 ToB class. Then again, the ToB guys have a lot more flexibility.

JaronK
Makes sense

People think ToB is broken because they believe core is balanced.
There are people who think core's balanced???

Ah, but recall: those classes are Magical(tm) and therefore can be as front-loaded and awesome as they want to be.

Ah, forgot.

[shadow_archmagi]

Makes sense

There are people who think core's balanced???



Well, yes.

There are a lot of people who never thought about using glitterdust and who therefore say

"Wait, the fighter can use an attack what does 4d6? But the wizard does 4d6! And the fighter can already FIGHT!"

[CycloneJoker]

Well, yes.

There are a lot of people who never thought about using glitterdust and who therefore say

"Wait, the fighter can use an attack what does 4d6? But the wizard does 4d6! And the fighter can already FIGHT!"

Depressing.

[shadow_archmagi]

Depressing.

how terrible that they have fun the wrong way

[sonofzeal]

how terrible that they have fun the wrong way
What they're describing isn't "a way of having fun". It's a narrowminded, flawed view of the potential of the system. It's that perspective that denies other ways of having fun (say, controller wizards), while most people on "this side" will acknowledge that it can certainly be fun even if it isn't optimal.

[Hammerhead]

But don't Incarnate, DFA, and maybe Totemist do the same at low levels?Does this hypothetical ToB-disliking group accept those? IME, groups that blanch at ToB have similar reactions to Incarnum, Warlocks and Savage Species for similar reasons.


There are people who think core's balanced???
Sure. But I think it's more common for groups to divide roles and gauge balance accordingly. So if a Warblade outfights the PHB Fighter, Barbarian or Paladin, its player will get funny looks. (And, again IME, the same goes for a Cleric or Bard that does the same).

[Grendus]

A lot depends on how well the characters and enemies are played. Many DM's have the enemies run recklessly at the melee instead of soaking the one AoO and going after the squishies behind them. With that, you don't need crowd control. You don't need the Crusader with Thicket of Blades, a spiked chain, improved trip, and combat reflexes to repeatedly slam them into the ground while the wizard hits them with repeated SoD's or just summons something to eat face. When the enemy plays like a real world enemy (where one stab is fatal) instead of like a tactical wargame simulator (where you have to watch your little red health bar), meatshields become useful.

As it's been said, in low OP games, ToB looks overpowered. In high OP games, they're one of the few options for competent melee outside of something useful but one dimensional (commoner charger, diplomancer, etc).

[Tael]

Does this hypothetical ToB-disliking group accept those? IME, groups that blanch at ToB have similar reactions to Incarnum, Warlocks and Savage Species for similar reasons.

I agree on the Incarnum and Warlock part (they can blast all day?!?) :smallwink:, but Savage Species in general is very poorly balanced. I don't ban it, but I sure as hell read anything my players are using from it.



Sure. But I think it's more common for groups to divide roles and gauge balance accordingly. So if a Warblade outfights the PHB Fighter, Barbarian or Paladin, its player will get funny looks. (And, again IME, the same goes for a Cleric or Bard that does the same).

Sometimes, but I've seen a few groups that just think that casters should be more powerful than the other classes. Mind boggling to me.

[CycloneJoker]

Does this hypothetical ToB-disliking group accept those? IME, groups that blanch at ToB have similar reactions to Incarnum, Warlocks and Savage Species for similar reasons.


Sure. But I think it's more common for groups to divide roles and gauge balance accordingly. So if a Warblade outfights the PHB Fighter, Barbarian or Paladin, its player will get funny looks. (And, again IME, the same goes for a Cleric or Bard that does the same).
I apologize, but I have problems believing someone could see a warlock as better than the wizard.I just cannot imagine someone knowing so little about the game they play. Sorcerer vs. wizard, I can see, but WARLOCK?

A lot depends on how well the characters and enemies are played. Many DM's have the enemies run recklessly at the melee instead of soaking the one AoO and going after the squishies behind them. With that, you don't need crowd control. You don't need the Crusader with Thicket of Blades, a spiked chain, improved trip, and combat reflexes to repeatedly slam them into the ground while the wizard hits them with repeated SoD's or just summons something to eat face. When the enemy plays like a real world enemy (where one stab is fatal) instead of like a tactical wargame simulator (where you have to watch your little red health bar), meatshields become useful.

As it's been said, in low OP games, ToB looks overpowered. In high OP games, they're one of the few options for competent melee outside of something useful but one dimensional (commoner charger, diplomancer, etc).

I guess I've never played a campaign were a warblade would be busted. Very good, yes, too good, maybe, but outright broken? Never. Also, I play my enemies smart as they should be, plus a little bit.

[Boci]

I apologize, but I have problems believing someone could see a warlock as better than the wizard.I just cannot imagine someone knowing so little about the game they play. Sorcerer vs. wizard, I can see, but WARLOCK?

http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-legacy-discussion/194344-how-warlock-not-overpowered.html

Some people are not good at analysis.

[Hammerhead]

I apologize, but I have problems believing someone could see a warlock as better than the wizard.I just cannot imagine someone knowing so little about the game they play. Sorcerer vs. wizard, I can see, but WARLOCK?
Imagine a game that starts at level 1. If the Wizard's player likes chucking damage dice, he's probably got 1-2 Magic missiles/day, doing about the same damage as the eldritch blast. The Wizard's also got 1-2 other level 1 spells per day, while the Warlock can spam some level 2 spell to his heart's content.

I'm not saying this is a fair critique. I'm not going to categorize the people who made it as the types to dig through books until discovering something like Fiery Burst/Precocious Apprentice that lets the Wizard do the Warlock's thing, but better, from the start. But I'm not going to call them stupid for missing it; just inexperienced at powergaming.

And the Savage Species complaint I've heard has been with those celestials that are like clerics++ until level 6 or 7. The Ghaele's the one I remember specifically.

[Fiery Diamond]

Tome of Battle classes have a much smaller optimization curve than many other classes, so in low optimization groups ToB classes look very powerful. Additionally, ToB classes are quite strong in the first 5 levels, when people aren't full attacking yet (usually), and those are the most commonly played levels.

As such, for a very large number of groups and campaigns, ToB classes look overpowered. If they played to higher levels or tried actually optimizing a bit, they'd find this was not the case.

JaronK

This is most of it. It's why I decided to disallow ToB in one of the games I ran: we played relatively low optimization: the cleric was a healer gish, the sorcerer was a blaster, the bard was a support (not a controller, just a "here, have some pluses!"), etc. We played with primarily core material. One player brought in a Warblade/Swordsage, which I initially allowed. We started at level 3. Yeah, she was outshining the sorcerer, never mind the rest of the group.

Basically: In a low-op, low-level group, ToB is significantly more powerful.

[ffone]

There's two parts to the Infinite Damage Crusader.

One is a feat that lets you reroll any damage die that comes up as a 1.

Another is the stance Aura of Chaos that lets you reroll any damage die that shows the maximum.

By using a weapon that does 1d2 damage, every die you roll is rerolled and added to your damage, and rerolled again, and again, ad infinium.

As for the original question, I think it's just another case of melee can't have nice things.

LOL

Isn't this like Xeno's Paradox? Sure, you do infinite damage...but by RAW, you have to keep rolling (even after you know the target is dead), effectively halting the universe? (Well, not the in-game universe, since it's all instantaneous...but the player could never finish rolling.)

Or is there a rule that adding damage die are optional and you can stop when you want to / once you have enough to slay target? (But if you do this to a troll...)

[Lord.Sorasen]

LOL

Isn't this like Xeno's Paradox? Sure, you do infinite damage...but by RAW, you have to keep rolling (even after you know the target is dead), effectively halting the universe? (Well, not the in-game universe, since it's all instantaneous...but the player could never finish rolling.)

Or is there a rule that adding damage die are optional and you can stop when you want to / once you have enough to slay target? (But if you do this to a troll...)

Achilles is racing a turtle. If the turtle wins the initiative check Achilles can never catch up.

[sonofzeal]

Isn't this like Xeno's Paradox?
Not really. It's just a straightforward infinite process, of the type that would have been intimately familiar to ancient greek geometers (remember, to this set "a line" meant something that extended infinitely in both directions). Zeno's paradoxes, IIRC, were designed to attack the sort of thinking they used, but none of the famous ones apply here.


Achilles is racing a turtle. If the turtle wins the initiative check Achilles can never catch up.
That paradox doesn't work in D&D with quantized movements. As soon as Achilles or the Turtle is moving less than 5' in the time interval specified, the paradox breaks down and they can indeed pass each other. In D&D, both time and space are "atomic", and Zeno fails to apply.

[Aemoh87]

If the tome of balance is broken what do you call the PHB druid class and spell list?

Even worse if the Tome is broken what is serpent kingdoms? Shenanigans to the power of WTF?

[Runestar]

There's a funny thread for those who argue ToB is too anime'ish.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10832.0

Basically, it argues how warlocks and barbarians too can be construed as being too anime'ish. :smallbiggrin:

[Lans]

I agree on the Incarnum and Warlock part (they can blast all day?!?) :smallwink:, but Savage Species in general is very poorly balanced. I don't ban it, but I sure as hell read anything my players are using from it.
.
The Incarnum has a higher start more inline with the warblade, compared to the warlock. 3d6 touch attack is a little OP at first level, and 6d6 at level 3, and 8d6 at level 4. Totemist is pouncing at level 2. Along with Shrodingers incarnate that might appear.

[quiet1mi]

...Along with Shrodingers incarnate that might appear.

Then again the Incarnate might have been dead all along...

[Essence_of_War]

I never understand all of this "broken" stuff. The PC's and the DM are all working together to get through an adventure and the enemies you fight don't have real feeling to be hurt when PC's get to use stuff out of these "broken" books.

The party is a team so if one PC is a bit stronger than the rest it only helps the team.

I feel like the amount of talking about "broken" and "unbalanced" that goes on here is more suitable for games that focus on PVP (wargames, mmorpg's etc).

Maybe I'm just playing the wrong edition of Dungeons and Dragons

Yes, DnD in particular, and rpgs in general are a collaborative effort, but collaborative efforts are usually the most fun when everyone feels like they're contributing to the group. If one PC is markedly better than the rest (I'm looking at you Natural Spell Druid w/ animal companion), the other PCs are probably going to have less fun. Hence the interest in balancing the relative power level of classes, you want to build groups where everyone can contribute to the story and feel like their contribution matters.

[Aemoh87]

That is a very rational idea but the problem with "brokeness" isn't because a character is too good. It's because a character is so good it can make it's party members useless. Encounters where the party is just there to watch the druid massacre everything aren't very fun for anyone, after a while the druid won't even enjoy it.

But it's part of character building to create something that is along the lines of what the party is building as well as not pointless. Pun Pun is the strongest character in the game but he has hopefully never been played, since he takes all the game out of it. And if you are a Pun Pun player I recommend the Nintendo game "Desert Bus" since it's right up your alley.

[Aemoh87]

But from a game perspective I have played a Samurai into epic levels and enjoyed it. I had to build creatively to make him powerful but the flavor fit perfectly. He took leadership and eventually had an army of undead (long story but he died...) followers who build a keep in his honor. Almost all of it was useless at high level but I had fun.

[Ozreth]

Meh, I suppose it all depends on the group. I know my group would be ok with having a "Regis" like halfling who cowered during battle and threw rocks from a distance and tried his best a being sneaky to no avail. Thats fun for us, especially when that character ends up doing something astounding somehow ha.

[faceroll]

LOL

Isn't this like Xeno's Paradox? Sure, you do infinite damage...but by RAW, you have to keep rolling (even after you know the target is dead), effectively halting the universe? (Well, not the in-game universe, since it's all instantaneous...but the player could never finish rolling.)

Or is there a rule that adding damage die are optional and you can stop when you want to / once you have enough to slay target? (But if you do this to a troll...)

It's not infinite damage. It's just an arbitrarily large amount of damage that is basically "I am going to flip this 1d2 until I get tired of it." So you don't take ALL the damage, you just take a lot of damage represented by a whole number that isn't actually that big, given time constraints of flipping a coin.

And yes, there's a clause in there to stop rolling.

[Greenish]

Totemist is pouncing at level 2.You can get Pounce at level 2, with natural weapons only, but you can't get natural weapons at the same time from the class (unless you're dragonblooded).

It won't be until level 6 that a totemist can bring their fierce natural attack melds to play with the pounce from Sphinx Claws.

[DeltaEmil]

Meh, I suppose it all depends on the group. I know my group would be ok with having a "Regis" like halfling who cowered during battle and threw rocks from a distance and tried his best a being sneaky to no avail. Thats fun for us, especially when that character ends up doing something astounding somehow ha.You can always simulate an useless coward in any gaming system of any edition and/or be a waste of time to focus upon for 3 out of 4 battle until that really cool moment appears (I generally like to play that), but if you belong to those sort of people who wants to be able to contribute as fully as the pro-active superswords-guy who does a supersword-slash or the ubermagic-girl who casts a ubermagic-incantation all the time in combat, like for example back-stabbing the bad guys like a shadowkewl-ninja from your favorite anime show, then you should only pay money for a rules-set that does allow you to do that. For D&D, this means that you can play a rock-throwing commoner amongst druids, clerics and wizards, but if you want to back-stab somebody once in a while (or every time), you can only do that if you're a rogue or something similar. And in "theory", the rogue (or fighter, barbarian, paladin, monk and whatever myriad of classes there are) would/should have been as powerful as the druid, cleric or wizard, when they simplified and streamlined the leveling up process and thought that casting spells once per day is the same as gaining a full +1 base attack bonus. How that turned out is obvious, nowadays.

tl;dr: If everyone wants to be super, but with a different schtick, then the different schticks on how to be super must be balanced and be able to do it like so.

[Myth]

It's broken if you are the guy who thinks Monks are the natural counter to Wizards and who thinks the toughest guy around is the Dwarf Fighter with 20 Con who takes Toughness x times. I know such a DM and I left all of his games, he is just too constipated to play with.

The strongest non-castery (as in, non RKV) combo you can get out of ToB is Warblade 10 / Eternal Blade 10. The best it can do is go full-attack nova with Time Stands Still + Island in Time, or use other maneuvers/stances/counters to get some different results if straight up slaughter is not the answer.

Is it better than Barbarian 20 using his Greater Rage for a single full attack? Yes. Is it better than a Fighter with Weapon Specialization? Yes. Does it deal more damage than an ubercharger? No. Is it better than an ubercharger? Yes, because it still gets more damage than most things can survive, what with massive damage rules and all. But it can also do other things.

Is it anywhere near the guys with Gate and Miracle? Hahahahaha!

[JaronK]

Is it anywhere near the guys with Gate and Miracle? Hahahahaha!

Of course it's near the guys with Gate and Miracle! Someone has to hold their stuff while they summon angels, you know. Otherwise the Wizard would get his arms tired.

JaronK

[Eldan]

Honestly?

Arguments I've heard live:

"Gate sucks! It costs XP and is just a transport spell! Summon Monster can handle the other part anyway!"
"Miracle? Well, I could ask my god for a new holy symbol if I lost mine..."

[Myth]

Well I've been playing and reading 3.5 for about a year and a half. In the beginning I thought good roleplaying can hold a game together on it's own. Now however, I am convinced that one must play with similarly skilled folk, or with those who are at least willing to learn.

Also for me skilled is a big part of playing optimized. Blindly following the guide can only do so much for you.

[CycloneJoker]

Of course it's near the guys with Gate and Miracle! Someone has to hold their stuff while they summon angels, you know. Otherwise the Wizard would get his arms tired.

JaronK
I actually LOL'd.

Honestly?

Arguments I've heard live:

"Gate sucks! It costs XP and is just a transport spell! Summon Monster can handle the other part anyway!"
"Miracle? Well, I could ask my god for a new holy symbol if I lost mine..."
My brain is breaking, now.

Well I've been playing and reading 3.5 for about a year and a half. In the beginning I thought good roleplaying can hold a game together on it's own. Now however, I am convinced that one must play with similarly skilled folk, or with those who are at least willing to learn.

Also for me skilled is a big part of playing optimized. Blindly following the guide can only do so much for you.

I agree with the last part a lot.

Also, for reference, the monk IS the natural counter for a wizard. You can kill him a week after meeting him, and never have to go near him after one meeting.

"Hi, this is my friend, Bob the Wizard."
Joe the monk initiate power handshake.
Two weeks later, epic wizard fails his fortitude save of, like three.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

"Hi, this is my friend, Bob the Wizard."
Joe the monk initiate power handshake.
Two weeks later, epic wizard fails his fortitude save of, like three.It is true, the monk is a fine counter to an epic wizard played by someone who does not know how epic wizards work. I'll let someone else explain how epic level wizards work*, but I find the "fortitude save of, like three" especially egregious. You realize that a straight level 20 wizard with 18 constitution after magic items, a +5 cloak of resistance and no other protections (aka a wizard played by someone who thought he was playing a commoner with WBL and Fireball) will have a fortitude save of +15? That's a 50% chance of success against a level 20 monk with WIS 22, or slightly less if the wisdom is higher. So if you somehow have the best plan ever to foil every other defense an actual wizard might have and you actually get to QP him, the plan still fails on a coin flip.

*A short primer: Demiplane shenanigans, clones, astral projections, and excessive divination abuse pre-epic. Immune to YES and create stars at will in epic.

[CycloneJoker]

It is true, the monk is a fine counter to an epic wizard played by someone who does not know how epic wizards work. I'll let someone else explain how epic level wizards work*, but I find the "fortitude save of, like three" especially egregious. You realize that a straight level 20 wizard with 18 constitution after magic items, a +5 cloak of resistance and no other protections (aka a wizard played by someone who thought he was playing a commoner with WBL and Fireball) will have a fortitude save of +15? That's a 50% chance of success against a level 20 monk with WIS 22, or slightly less if the wisdom is higher. So if you somehow have the best plan ever to foil every other defense an actual wizard might have and you actually get to QP him, the plan still fails on a coin flip.

*A short primer: Demiplane shenanigans, clones, astral projections, and excessive divination abuse pre-epic. Immune to YES and create stars at will in epic.
First off, it was an intentional exaggeration with a bit of humor, not being serious. I have played with people who play wizards, though I've always hated them. Second, I do not think they know that they've been the target of an assassination, so you could probably try again, and third, I can't think of a better way to try to assassinate one, beyond being a wizard-like think.

[Lans]

You can get Pounce at level 2, with natural weapons only, but you can't get natural weapons at the same time from the class (unless you're dragonblooded).

It won't be until level 6 that a totemist can bring their fierce natural attack melds to play with the pounce from Sphinx Claws.

Your right, I had Landshark Boots effect slightly wrong, but still 4 attacks and a move.

Though I think the Choas Roc bind can do it.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

First off, it was an intentional exaggeration with a bit of humor, not being serious. I have played with people who play wizards, though I've always hated them. Second, I do not think they know that they've been the target of an assassination, so you could probably try again, and third, I can't think of a better way to try to assassinate one, beyond being a wizard-like think.I might be a bit sore from RL arguments about the effectiveness of Quivering Palm, so I apologize if that showed through, but I do stand by my position that there are better ways to kill a wizard without being a wizard than being a high level monk. Generally these methods involve full casting of some sort, or at least a slayer gish, but that's the way it goes.

[2xMachina]

Torc? of Conscious Effort. Make a Conc check instead of Fortitude. That'll be +27 for a lvl 20 Wizard? (Not including Tunic of steady spellcasting, or masterwork tools. They will pass on a non-1.)

Wizards are hard to kill. They have so many tricks that you probably can't even find them, and when you do, he knew all along you were trying to find him, why, when, and probably already led you into a trap when he shows up.

[MeeposFire]

Torc? of Conscious Effort. Make a Conc check instead of Fortitude. That'll be +27 for a lvl 20 Wizard? (Not including Tunic of steady spellcasting, or masterwork tools. They will pass on a non-1.)

Wizards are hard to kill. They have so many tricks that you probably can't even find them, and when you do, he knew all along you were trying to find him, why, when, and probably already led you into a trap when he shows up.

Well that is always a possibility with a wizard though it is not a given. We do tend to assume that in these conversations however.

[The Big Dice]

Wizards are hard to kill. They have so many tricks that you probably can't even find them, and when you do, he knew all along you were trying to find him, why, when, and probably already led you into a trap when he shows up.

Wizards are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

They're either Schroedinger's Coward, using their spontaneously prepared spells to run away and hide. Or they're cursing because they didn't get any direct damage spells and things pass their saves more often than they like to admit to.

[The Glyphstone]

Wizards are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

They're either Schroedinger's Coward, using their spontaneously prepared spells to run away and hide. Or they're cursing because they didn't get any direct damage spells and things pass their saves more often than they like to admit to.

Wizards prepare debuffs that allow saves?:smallsmile:


Though the Quivering Palm thing amuses me. It might actually have a shot at working if the wizard is core-only. Outside core, he'll have the Heart of Elements combo going and be immune to critical hits (and thus QP-proof)...but hey, it's better than nothing.

[2xMachina]

Technically, just 2 feats can make a Wizard spontaneous. Alacritous Cogitation (this is prereq) + Versatile Spellcaster.

Spend 2 prepared lvlx spells to spontaneously cast 1 lvlx+1 spell. (Yeah, no spontaneous cantrips, but do you care about those?)

[Tael]

Technically, just 2 feats can make a Wizard spontaneous. Alacritous Cogitation (this is prereq) + Versatile Spellcaster.

Spend 2 prepared lvlx spells to spontaneously cast 1 lvlx+1 spell. (Yeah, no spontaneous cantrips, but do you care about those?)

Huh, nice combo. Although Spontaneous Divination would probably be better, negating the need to learn divination spells. I doubt many DM's would let that fly though.

[Mordokai]

The latter: Iron Heart Surge. It allows stupid things like ending the sun, and other nonsense. It's just badly worded.

Ok, after reading it up, I can see why it would be worded badly. One could argue you could end effects like time stop and similar, which, to me, is obviously out of line and any sane DM will say as much.

But what did you head in mind when you said "ending the sun"?

[2xMachina]

Huh, nice combo. Although Spontaneous Divination would probably be better, negating the need to learn divination spells. I doubt many DM's would let that fly though.

Hmm, I agree. Versatile made Cogitation useless. I was thinking of scaling up. Start with 1 spontaneous, then all later.

[DeltaEmil]

But what did you head in mind when you said "ending the sun"?The sun existing is an effect upon you. You use Iron Heart Surge to end the sun existing.
Or the existence of Pun-Pun, the kobold supreme, is an effect that affects you (in whatever way you say). You end the existence of Pun-Pun.

[The-Mage-King]

But what did you head in mind when you said "ending the sun"?

"I'm feeling warm. IRON HEART SURGE!"

[/Sun]

Basically, it's so vaguely worded that you can eliminate anything tha affects your character in any way, just by using it.

Gravity? For the weak.

Universal motion? Not anymore.

GDeath? An annoyance.

[Starbuck_II]

"
GDeath? An annoyance.

Wait, but you can't take the action while dead because you would still be unconscious from being below 0 hp.

[CycloneJoker]

Wait, but you can't take the action while dead because you would still be unconscious from being below 0 hp.

Ah, but you are, very slowly, aging and dying. No more age and no more death. Goody.

[quiet1mi]

There's two parts to the Infinite Damage Crusader.

One is a feat that lets you reroll any damage die that comes up as a 1.

Another is the stance Aura of Chaos that lets you reroll any damage die that shows the maximum.

By using a weapon that does 1d2 damage, every die you roll is rerolled and added to your damage, and rerolled again, and again, ad infinium.

As for the original question, I think it's just another case of melee can't have nice things.

Wow, Don't mess with Kelgar the Terrible, he has his spoon handy...

[Greenish]

Ok, after reading it up, I can see why it would be worded badly. One could argue you could end effects like time stop and similar, which, to me, is obviously out of line and any sane DM will say as much.

But what did you head in mind when you said "ending the sun"?You can't end Time Stop (of someone else), since you can't act during it. You can't even use Iron Heart Surge to remove Hold Person, as written.

The idea of surging out sun usually uses a character with daylight weakness or the like, and relies on the fact that any finite time period can in theory be measured in chunks of six seconds, ie. rounds.

[Zergrusheddie]

The group that I generally play with always saw Evoker Wizards as being the be all and end all. It's also the same group that thought a Druid Archer that never utilized spells (aside from Heals and self-buffs), an animal companion, or wildshape could be effective. To an "old fashioned" group like that, anything that is a straight upgrade from the Fighter, Monk, and Paladin would be overpowered.

ToB probably gets all the flak because of a few things:
1.The Warblade and the Fighter are essentially the same class, but the Warblade is the hot princess compared to it's frumpy sister the Fighter. In this case, if something is so obviously better than the Fighter is at fighting, ToB could be called overpowered.

2. Some groups just hate "new" things. The group that would cry foul on ToB would probably cry foul on Incarnum, Psionics, and Binders.

3. "Melee doesn't deserve nice things."

[SuperFish]

No, Iron Heart Surge cannot end the sun by any sane interpretation.

At best, it would reset a Vampire's combustion time.

[Greenish]

No, Iron Heart Surge cannot end the sun by any sane interpretation.None has claimed that. :smalltongue:

Still doesn't stop it from being badly written. It sounds like something you could use to shrug of, say, Hold Person, but that's no go, while Anti-Magic Field is a valid target.

[Denomar]

Tome of Battle came about right near the end of the 3.5 cycle when it seems clear that WoTC was testing to figure out how they wanted to design 4th edition.

Its not an unreasonable stretch to say that the design of at will and encounter powers was directly related to the design of Tome of Battle.

Moreover, its not right to try and compare it to the core melee characters as in essence they are designed for the same purpose. There was plenty of grousing about how much better vancian casters were than melee characters, especially at high levels where there are many multiple things that a wizard can do in a turn where the fighter is either tripping something, or hitting it in the head. Tome of Battle does a lot to alleviate that.

Assuming that everyone understands that doing anything infinitely and worrying about being the Best At Everything in a cooperative storytelling experience is beside the point than I don't think there's much chance of their being a problem with the tome of battle.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff of Moddingham: Please don't resurrect old threads (older than six weeks since the last post). Please review the Forum Rules.