Warblade vs Crusader

[Half-orc Bard]

Which do you prefer and why? I have recently found out about ToB and will soon play a warblade this week. I just chose it because of the free aspect which I love! Then I borrowed my friend's ToB to check out the swordsage and crusader. The swordsage seems awesome, but it has a different purpose. The warblade and crusader on the other hand seem to both be awesome meatsheilds. I just want to know what you think : )

[The-Mage-King]

If you're playing a warblade as a meatshield, you're doing it wrong.

The purpose of a warblade is DPR- Damage Per Round. They get in, get fighting, and try to not get hit.

Crusaders, though, are the walking tank. They try to get the enemies to attack them first, and can recover their lost hit points while harming foes.

That said, I prefer warblade. The image of a glory seeking warrior moving with grace across the battlefield appeals to me. Also, the entire Iron Heart discipine.

[Jude_H]

I dislike the Crusader's recovery mechanic, and the number of choices it gives a first-level character are kind of depressing. The Crusader's description reads too much like a justification for me to get into it.

I also have a thing for skill points.

The one thing Crusader really has going for it IMO is that it gishes better. Both in terms of the ToB gish support and in terms of qualification for outside prestige classes (which tend to have a thing for martial weapon proficiencies).

[AslanCross]

I like the warblade as it has more variety (more disciplines to choose from).

Crusaders tend to have almost the exact same build as each other, as they get enough maneuvers known to cover all the good Devoted Spirit, Stone Dragon, and White Raven maneuvers. As such it might be nice to actually allow Stone Dragon to be swapped out for other disciplines depending on the Crusader's deity/cause.

What Mage King said is true, though---a Warblade is better for DPS, while a Crusader is better for tanking (that is, absorbing damage preventing enemies from attacking allies).

A Warblade has only Medium Armor Prof, but has maneuvers that allow for quick mobility (Tiger Claw and Diamond Mind). While they have d12 HD, that only adds an average of 1 HP per hit die.

A Crusader has Heavy Armor Prof and has a clear damage absorption mechanism. The tendency to favor White Raven maneuvers for tactical superiority will also keep allies alive more than the Warblade can.

[Eldariel]

Warblade:
- Mundane badass
- Iron Heart SUUUURGE!
- Versatile combat styles (Tiger Claw & Diamond Mind make any weapon combination workable)
- Good recovery
- Too few maneuvers readied

Crusader:
- Divine-like badass
- Martial healing (morale, if you will)
- Natural frontline commander type
- Best recovery
- Not complete control over which maneuvers you have each fight (sucks)
- Hard as heck to kill


Overall, I prefer Warblade 'cause Diamond Mind is my favorite school (Devoted Spirit close second tho; I do like my Eternal Blades and Masters of the Nine) and I like variety in terms of combat styles. Also, I like control over which maneuvers you start with more than the superior refresh mechanic of Crusader. Crusader is slightly more durable in general thanks to Devoted Spirit & Delayed Damage Pool tho.

[MeeposFire]

Another way to look at it fluffwise is fighter or paladin?

[Half-orc Bard]

If you're playing a warblade as a meatshield, you're doing it wrong.

The purpose of a warblade is DPR- Damage Per Round. They get in, get fighting, and try to not get hit.

I'm not sure about this. True warblades do crazy damage, but d12 hit dice and medium armor is actually okay with a pretty good dex. I won't say that they are better than crusaders, but compared to like core meat shields he's good. I'd say he is as good a meatsheild as a barbarian

[AslanCross]

The barbarian gets Rage and DR, though, and eventually access to PrCs that allow for nigh-infinite damage absorption (Frenzied Berserker for one).

I've seen this play out in my games---the Warblade tends to get hit a lot, but once she gets to critical levels she uses her superior mobility (thanks to Tumble and Sudden Leap) to get out of the furball. The Crusader's the one who stands his ground and takes the damage, absorbing as much damage as he can. While that might just be the players' play style, the mechanics of both classes and their maneuver sets really help this.

[Eldariel]

Meatshield isn't something a class is, it's something you can build towards. Meatshield's primary function is being able to draw fire from the allies and being able to take that fire and while Warblade is somewhat more limited in the former than Crusader, he's just as capable of taking a focus as Crus.

A Warblade generally has to resort to usual feat combinations to do the control that forces enemies to go for him (for reasons other than his damage); AoO Trips/Stand Still/Bull Rush & co. are v. good for this purpose as are Dazing strikes and movement disabling strikes and all that (so ToB isn't wasted; it's just Devoted Spirit offers both, some maneuvers that allow protecting allies and maneuvers to negate damage being dealt to you or allies).

[Half-orc Bard]

Okay youve won warblades aren't meatsheilds unless strangely optimized

[Hazzardevil]

I think that all round warblades are better. Warblades get better access to dciplines, a bit more hp and good class features.

Crusaders have rubbish class features and can access all their maneuvers as long as they don't spend feats.

I prefer warblades really, because its also less of a headache in pbp.

[Wings of Peace]

I'm fond of the Warblade myself. I wish they had heavy armor proficiency by default though. Overall I just like the Warblade's maneuver selection and recovery mechanic more.

[Half-orc Bard]

Whats the crusaders recovery system again?

[Lapak]

Whats the crusaders recovery system again?They get a random sub-selection of their readied maneuvers available at the beginning of a fight. Every round, another (randomly-chosen) maneuver becomes available. If combat is still going when everything readied has been activated, they start over with a new random sub-set of their readied maneuvers.

Upside is they don't have to do ANYTHING to recharge - both the swordsage and the warblade have to take an action of some kind. Downside is they don't have control over which options they have in any given round.

[Eldariel]

Whats the crusaders recovery system again?

You start with N-3 (N-2 with Extra Granted Maneuver-feat) maneuvers available where N is your number of readied maneuvers. Each round, you get one of the missing maneuvers available. When you have access to all your maneuvers, next round you get randomized new maneuvers refreshing all of them in the process.

In other words, Crusader recovery is the only system that recovers your maneuvers without spending an action on it, or placing any restrictions on your maneuver use for any round; exceedingly useful in longer encounters.

[Diamondeye]

Ok, first, lets not exaggerate. A Warblade is not bad at "tanking"; just not quite as good a choice as a Crusader. Similarly, a Crusader is not bad at melee damage, just not as good as the warblade. Purely mechanically, each class has a role it is better at, but you are not "doing it wrong" if you choose the class you like and then make it do the other role.

Personally, Warblade is the class I like better of the two; it is tied with Swordsage for my most favorite class in 3.X. Crusader, I like stylistically, but I am not crazy about the granted maneuvers or the other class features. Not that they're bad or weak, just not what would be my personal first choice to play.

The Warblade has the advantages of wider martial discipline selection, and IMO, better disciplines since I consider Tiger Claw and Diamond Mind to be the two best disciplines. In addition, the Warblade gets access to two of the three Crusader disciplines, so either way you will get access to Stone Dragon and White Raven.

The warblade's class features are all nice, but IMO its greatest strength is that it is an unbelievably versatile class, fluff-wise

Want a rapier-wielding Fencer? No problem; Iron Heart + Diamond Mind, and a chain shirt; possibly a 3-level dip in Swashbuckler and there you go.

Want a Barbarian? Greataxe, Tiger Claw, Stone Dragon and Iron Heart and again, ready to go.

Want a dual-wielding knife-fighter with a hint of stealth? Bloodclaw Master is incredibly easy to get into from Warblade

Want a sword-and-board fighter? Take the warblade straight out of the box with whatever maneuvers sound cool, and there you go. Same with a 2-hander, just change gear selection. With weapon familiarity, you can actually have both at once

Want a Gish? Easy; a little Warblade, a little Wizard, Jade Phoenix Mage and Abjurant Champion in whatever proportions suit your ideas and there you are.

A Samurai? A Warblade can be a Samurai straight from the start, or you can dip a level or 2 from one of the OA Samurais.

I could think up plenty more.

Now, the Crusader has its perks, don't get me wrong. Want a divine Gish? Ruby Knight Vindicator can be reflavored easily if Wee Jas doesn't work.

Any sort of paladin/blackguard themed character can be made from a Crusader with little effort.

Its emphasis on Charisma makes it fairly strong as a social character

Its much easier to plan your maneuver progression out with a Crusader. You get more maneuvers to start, and with only 3 disciplines to pick from, you almost can't miss the prerequisites for higher-level maneuvers. Especially at the end lines, Stone Dragon has no prereqs and Devoted Spirit requires only 3 maneuvers for its level 9 strike, less than any other discipline except Stone Dragon. With Warblade, it can be tempting to try to get every cool maneuver and you don't have nearly enough to do that.

Overall, my choice would be Warblade unless I wanted to specifically play something more thematically appropriate to the Crusader, like a Paladin archetype.

[Veyr]

Crusader has access to better disciplines (the Disciplines are generally ranked Devoted Spirit > White Raven > Shadow Hand > others > Desert Wind > Stone Dragon, though it must be said that in every case it is only "very slightly better than" and a heavily-physical party can easily make White Raven better than Devoted Spirit), and a far better recovery mechanic. This makes the Crusader a bit better than the Warblade in general.

[Eldariel]

Crusader has access to better disciplines (the Disciplines are generally ranked Devoted Spirit > White Raven > Shadow Hand > others > Desert Wind > Stone Dragon, though it must be said that in every case it is only "very slightly better than" and a heavily-physical party can easily make White Raven better than Devoted Spirit), and a far better recovery mechanic. This makes the Crusader a bit better than the Warblade in general.

I kinda disagree with the ratings; I'm not sure where that list came from (I don't remember such a thread on BG). Devoted Spirit is good but Diamond Mind has most of the gamechanging maneuvers and stances (unless we're using 1d2 weapons and Imbued Healing: Luck, and even that's questionable...). Stance of Alacrity has a legitimate claim for the strongest stance in the book and stuff like Bounding Assault, Moment of Alacrity, save-maneuvers, Time Stands Still, Avalanche of Blades, Nightmare Blades, Emerald Razor, Quicksilver Motion and so on give Diamond Mind scary offense and mobility and some decent defense to boot.

I'd also rate White Raven over Devoted Spirit; White Raven Tactics, White Raven Hammer, Leading the Charge, the various Charge-maneuvers and a ton of solid support abilities. Order Forged From Chaos notably offers you something to do with your move action when you don't need it, and can be exceedingly powerful in parties.

Also, Iron Heart is no slouch; Iron Heart Surge, Iron Heart Focus, Adamantine Hurricane, Steel Wind, Wall of Blades, Manticore Parry and all that. Devoted Spirit is strong offensively and has the healing abilities but it's a very immobile school with only the charges for mobility, and has a woeful shortage of efficient counters and boosts. It's got solid power but little flexibility. I'd rate it maybe 3rd overall, after Diamond Mind and White Raven. In my opinion, Warblade definitely has the stronger disciplines.

[darkdragoon]

I think that all round warblades are better. Warblades get better access to dciplines, a bit more hp and good class features.

Crusaders have rubbish class features and can access all their maneuvers as long as they don't spend feats.

I prefer warblades really, because its also less of a headache in pbp.

More is not necessarily better, especially given that Crusaders get Devoted Spirit and White Raven. Other than maybe some of the Diamond Mind save moves there's not much they'd like from disciplines they don't already have.

1 more HP on average is nothing to be impressed by. Steely Resolve on its own soaks up more damage, and does so each turn.

I like the idea of stuff like Weapon Aptitude, Battle Ardor etc. but boosting saves and the like keeps you upright.

Crusaders don't have to burn a feat on Adaptive Style and/or actions to refresh maneuvers.

[danzibr]

Personally, I prefer Warblade. They can do absolutely ludicrous amounts of damage in a round.

Crusaders can still output plenty of damage, but just based on personal taste, I prefer a lone fighter over a commander.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Personally, I prefer Warblade. They can do absolutely ludicrous amounts of damage in a round.

Crusaders can still output plenty of damage, but just based on personal taste, I prefer a lone fighter over a commander.

I prefer warblade too, but what makes you think warblades aren't commanders? They have access to white raven.

[Eldariel]

More is not necessarily better, especially given that Crusaders get Devoted Spirit and White Raven. Other than maybe some of the Diamond Mind save moves there's not much they'd like from disciplines they don't already have.

Au contraire, they specifically lack in terms of counters and to lesser extent, boosts. Crusaders aren't also nearly as mobile as Swordsages and Warblades (who can have swift action movement from level 1 in Sudden Leap) and lack the synergistic damage multipliers from other schools (though Devoted Spirit and White Raven are more than passable for damage, as well).

They do what they do well (exceedingly well, in fact) and they're very versatile within their own role as a frontline beater and a strategic commander, but there's certainly a lot the other schools would offer that Crusaders do not have access to.

[navar100]

Both are equally good, but I favor the Crusader because you get more maneuvers. You have more leeway to diversify your maneuver shticks. I also like the free recovery mechanic. I know some people don't care for the random granting that accompanies it, but I overcome it by not being absolutely dependent upon any one maneuver, including White Raven Tactics. :smallwink:

However, I could still easily enjoy playing a Warblade. It allows all three fighting styles to shine - two weapon style, two-handed style, and even sword and shield since you can still dish out great damage if you prefer a more defensive posture. The recovery mechanic works fine.

[Sir Enigma]

From level 2 onward, Crusaders know only one maneuver more than a warblade, and warblades have 5 schools to choose from rather than 3, so I would say warblades actually have the more diversity of the two.

Personally I prefer the Warblade, since it fits more to my playstyle - I like the slightly more damage-focused class over the more defensive, tanky class, plus I love Diamond Mind maneuvers. Never got to play a crusader past the opening couple levels, though - maybe I'd like them more at higher level.

[darkdragoon]

Au contraire, they specifically lack in terms of counters and to lesser extent, boosts. Crusaders aren't also nearly as mobile as Swordsages and Warblades (who can have swift action movement from level 1 in Sudden Leap) and lack the synergistic damage multipliers from other schools (though Devoted Spirit and White Raven are more than passable for damage, as well).

They do what they do well (exceedingly well, in fact) and they're very versatile within their own role as a frontline beater and a strategic commander, but there's certainly a lot the other schools would offer that Crusaders do not have access to.

Most of the counters are just reactionary moves. As noted Diamond Mind and Setting Sun ones can be useful, but Shield Counter is the only upfront *POW* "Oh I'm sorry, where you trying to attack somebody?" Its only catch is of course, it requires a shield while a lot of Crusaders prefer a 2-handed reach weapon over sword and board.

Similarly, Defensive Rebuke usually leads to more AoOs, and the white Raven ones tend to be "everybody move". For the most part I find those more useful than an extra 1d6 fire damage or such.

[Eldariel]

Most of the counters are just reactionary moves. As noted Diamond Mind and Setting Sun ones can be useful, but Shield Counter is the only upfront *POW* "Oh I'm sorry, where you trying to attack somebody?" Its only catch is of course, it requires a shield while a lot of Crusaders prefer a 2-handed reach weapon over sword and board.

Similarly, Defensive Rebuke usually leads to more AoOs, and the white Raven ones tend to be extra movement and the like. For the most part I find those more useful than an extra 1d6 fire damage or such.

...what in the world makes you think I'm talking about Desert Wind out of all schools here :smallconfused: Yeah, the Shield-maneuvers are good but they rely on wielding a shield, which cuts into your damage. Which is fine but again, it's not without a cost. And White Raven maneuvers don't really grant you mobility; there's some charges but they're all charges in direct line. You can move allies with it but not yourself.

Further, Diamond Mind has Moment of Alacrity as an initiative hax and Stance of Alacrity for action economy breakage. I don't doubt Crusader would love those. And One with Shadow is an insanely good counter from Shadow Hand and Shadow Blink is likewise exceedingly useful. And Iron Heart Surge has tons upon tons of uses (one of the best ways not to get mauled by Anti-Magic Fields, for one). Crusader is fine but to say they wouldn't benefit of the rest of the schools is...hard to believe.

[Veyr]

After your post, Eldariel, I tried to remember where I saw that ranking of disciplines, and could not. I have not sufficiently analyzed them myself to say for sure. That said, Devoted Spirit and White Raven are definitely two of the better schools, even if Diamond Mind, Iron Heart, and Shadow Hand give them competition. A Crusader would definitely love access to those, but can also has access to enough awesome to be awesome. That, combined with their greatly-superior Recovery mechanic, puts Crusader ahead in my mind.

[balistafreak]

Most of the counters are just reactionary moves. As noted Diamond Mind and Setting Sun ones can be useful, but Shield Counter is the only upfront *POW* "Oh I'm sorry, where you trying to attack somebody?" Its only catch is of course, it requires a shield while a lot of Crusaders prefer a 2-handed reach weapon over sword and board.

Similarly, Defensive Rebuke usually leads to more AoOs, and the white Raven ones tend to be "everybody move". For the most part I find those more useful than an extra 1d6 fire damage or such.

The advantage of boosts/counters is that they provide an outlet for your swift/immediate actions when you're not using them - they might be reactionary, but the added power is extremely helpful.

[Dusk Eclipse]

So the lighting warrior of the ToB classes would have Swordsage Maneuvers Known, readied and swordsage stance progression. Warblade HD and recovery maneuver, crusaders Zealeaous surge and access to Diamond Mind, Iron Heart, Devoted Spirit, Shadow Hand, White Raven and Tiger Claw.

But it wouldn't be OP because it doesn't get a familiar, nor he can specialize in a discipline :smalltongue:

[Aricandor]

Of the two I prefer the Warblade. Swift action is enough for convenience, having a warrior with reason to get a good Int score is neat, Iron Heart is fantabulous and Dual Stance is so much awesome. :smallsmile:

Crusaders are good too, of course, but the delayed damage mechanic makes my head hurt in practical play.

[Dienekes]

After your post, Eldariel, I tried to remember where I saw that ranking of disciplines, and could not. I have not sufficiently analyzed them myself to say for sure. That said, Devoted Spirit and White Raven are definitely two of the better schools, even if Diamond Mind, Iron Heart, and Shadow Hand give them competition. A Crusader would definitely love access to those, but can also has access to enough awesome to be awesome. That, combined with their greatly-superior Recovery mechanic, puts Crusader ahead in my mind.

If memory serves the rankings go (more or less):
Devoted Spirit/Diamond Mind
Iron Heart/White Raven (in melee heavy parties)
Shadow Hand/Tiger Claw
Setting Sun/White Raven (without a melee heavy party)
Desert Wind/Stone Dragon

However, there are multiple rankings I've seen but basically the gist of them all are Devoted Spirit and Diamond Mind are awesome. The rest are also awesome but placed somewhere in the middle with Desert Wind and Stone Dragon look up sadly at their betters.

Now of the two, I prefer Warblade, but that's largely because I like my warriors magicless badasses. And there's something great about my first ToB character focusing Diamond Mind and Iron Heart while nabbing White Raven Tactics.

[Veyr]

So the lighting warrior of the ToB classes would have [...] Warblade [...] recovery maneuver
No martial adept will ever come close to the Lightning Warrior; the Lightning Warrior also had d20 HD, which is a great deal better than the Warblade's.
The Crusader's recovery mechanic is much better than the Warblade's.

[Dusk Eclipse]

No martial adept will ever come close to the Lightning Warrior; the Lightning Warrior also had d20 HD, which is a great deal better than the Warblade's.
The Crusader's recovery mechanic is much better than the Warblade's.
I have never really paid much attention to crusaders to be honest; I am not too fond on the holy warrior archetype. So that went in as a personal preference.

And it was just a joke (however bad it is) I know that the Lighting warrior is definitely the most overpowered base class (homebrewed or not)

[Sir Enigma]

The Crusader's recovery mechanic is much better than the Warblade's.

Debatable - the warblade has to spend a swift action every few rounds, but in return gets more control over its maneuvers - very annoying to not be granted your charging maneuvers at the beginning of a battle when they're most useful!

On the other hand, it does mean the Crusader can use a maneuver every round, while the warblade has the occasional round where they're refreshing and have to make a normal attack instead.

Personally, I'd call it about even.

[Veyr]

Debatable - the warblade has to spend a swift action every few rounds, but in return gets more control over its maneuvers - very annoying to not be granted your charging maneuvers at the beginning of a battle when they're most useful!

On the other hand, it does mean the Crusader can use a maneuver every round, while the warblade has the occasional round where they're refreshing and have to make a normal attack instead.

Personally, I'd call it about even.
I have played a Crusader a great deal, and I have yet to be in a single situation where I didn't have the maneuver I needed. There was only once that there was even a situation where there was a particular maneuver I was hoping to get (the Swordsage needed healing in an AMF, stat, so I was very happy to draw Revitalizing Strike). The vast majority of the time, any maneuvers you have are useful, IMO. And not having to waste actions is huge.

[Sir Enigma]

Admittedly my experience with Crusaders is limited - but I was forever being frustrated by not having the maneuver I wanted, usually a charge at the beginning of a battle (and then getting it later when I was already in melee range).

On the flipside, when I've played Warblades, I've never felt that the lost swift action every 3 rounds or so was a big deal.

[Gnaeus]

I have played a Crusader a great deal, and I have yet to be in a single situation where I didn't have the maneuver I needed. There was only once that there was even a situation where there was a particular maneuver I was hoping to get (the Swordsage needed healing in an AMF, stat, so I was very happy to draw Revitalizing Strike). The vast majority of the time, any maneuvers you have are useful, IMO. And not having to waste actions is huge.

A random pick from a bag in which all the options are awesome, is awesome.

[Veyr]

The Swift isn't a big deal; it's being forced to use the Standard on a single attack, not being allowed to use a Strike or make a Full Attack, that really sucks about it.

[Greenish]

The Swift isn't a big deal; it's being forced to use the Standard on a single attack, not being allowed to use a Strike or make a Full Attack, that really sucks about it.You can full attack.

[Veyr]

Huh, you're right; I'd misread that all this time.

[MeeposFire]

I have played a Crusader a great deal, and I have yet to be in a single situation where I didn't have the maneuver I needed. There was only once that there was even a situation where there was a particular maneuver I was hoping to get (the Swordsage needed healing in an AMF, stat, so I was very happy to draw Revitalizing Strike). The vast majority of the time, any maneuvers you have are useful, IMO. And not having to waste actions is huge.

Yes but you were using the number of readied maneuvers from the crusader which is much smaller. This example had swordsage numbers which means you are much more likely to not get what you want. Though you could just build to make it so you would likely;y not care about which maneuvers you had of course.

[navar100]

From level 2 onward, Crusaders know only one maneuver more than a warblade, and warblades have 5 schools to choose from rather than 3, so I would say warblades actually have the more diversity of the two.

Personally I prefer the Warblade, since it fits more to my playstyle - I like the slightly more damage-focused class over the more defensive, tanky class, plus I love Diamond Mind maneuvers. Never got to play a crusader past the opening couple levels, though - maybe I'd like them more at higher level.

Crusaders ready more maneuvers than Warblades, which is a major difference. Warblades have access to more schools, but they can't ready them all. Due to prerequisites for the higher level maneuvers, Warblades can't efficiently know and ready from more than 3 disciplines anyway, and the third one is sparingly. It's possible to know at least one maneuver from each discipline a Warblade has access to, but he can't use them all nor keep up such diversity for the highest possible maneuvers known for a level as the levels progress. Access to more schools gives a Warblade player a choice of more fighting styles when creating the character. A Crusader is more limited.


Debatable - the warblade has to spend a swift action every few rounds, but in return gets more control over its maneuvers - very annoying to not be granted your charging maneuvers at the beginning of a battle when they're most useful!


That's probably why the charge maneuvers Crusaders have access to don't provoke attacks of opportunity for moving. It allows Crusaders to use the maneuvers for the non-first round of combat more easily.

[Firechanter]

Both are awesome at what they do, and what they do has been stated already.

Personally, I like Warblade better mainly because:
- I prefer offense over defense (I'm more the butt-kicker player type)
- I prefer to have full control over my readied maneuvers
- I like to play intelligent characters, and Warblades support that better

Again, purely personal preferences. Crusaders are also awesome, and I'd certainly play one of them some day.

[Wings of Peace]

One of the main reasons I prefer the Warblade over the Crusader is I find it easier to inappropriately touch the action economy with a Warblade's recovery mechanic.

[danzibr]

I prefer warblade too, but what makes you think warblades aren't commanders? They have access to white raven.

Hmm yeah you're right. I suppose I think of Warblade as DPS that has the capability to lead and Crusader a leader that has the capability to tank.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Why does everyone keep saying that Crusader recovery is superior to Warblade. They are both better than the other for their class.

Cusader-get's manuevers back constantly never has to pause so he can just grind along using whatever manuevers oppurtunity/divine inspiration allow. This fits their grindy tank role.

Warblade-Starts with all manuevers and can get manuevers back by full attacking. A well built Warblade should do respectable damage on a full attack so the action isn't truly a "waste". Unlike a Crusader a Warblade has tons of great immeadiate action manuevers available he could easily use 5-6 manuevers in 3 rounds or use a single manuever like IHS or one of the DM save manuevers and want to get it back next round.

Both are better for them than the alternative. If one has to be better I'd say Warblade because if you let a Swordsage pick Crusader or Warblade recovery he'd take Warblade.

[The-Mage-King]

Standards attacking. Not full attack to recover, but a normal one.

[Eldariel]

Standards attacking. Not full attack to recover, but a normal one.

Err, what?

[The-Mage-King]

Err, what?

Hand of Vecna said that it was a full attack to recover maneuvers as a warblade. It's a swift, followed by a standard action to either flourish your weapon (actually part of the text!) or make an attack.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I've seen people going both ways on this here's where I think the controversy stems from.

From the Warblade Web Exerpt:
You can recover all expended maneuvers with a single swift action, which must be immediately followed in the same round with a melee attack or using a standard action to do nothing else in the round (such as executing a quick, harmless flourish with your weapon). You cannot initiate a maneuver or change your stance while you are recovering your expended maneuvers, but you can remain in a stance in which you began your turn.

I went through the SRD and the exact words "melee attack" appears as an option for a standard action however those exact words do not appear under the full attack option. They are not however exclusive to the standard action attack they also appear under AoO so by a very specific reading of RAW a Warblade can refresh manuevers after a standard action attack, an AoO, a charge and perhaps some other situations but not after a full attack.

Again this is a very specific reading of RAW and I've never seen anyone making the argument mention that the text "melee attack" appears in charge and AoO.

Mage King your using some words and phrases out of order in a way that would be more suggestive of your interpretation.

[Eldariel]

Hand of Vecna said that it was a full attack to recover maneuvers as a warblade. It's a swift, followed by a standard action to either flourish your weapon (actually part of the text!) or make an attack.

The swift action must be followed either by a melee attack (any will do; full attack, standard action attack, whatever - all that matters is that melee attack occurs immediately after the recovery; the text does not discriminate and makes no mention of the type of action the attack should take - indeed, the whole "standard action to flourish" is mentioned as a secondary option after the "an attack") or a standard action to flourish.

Full attack, standard action attack or if you somehow manage it, even an AoO will fulfill that prerequisite. As long as the next thing after the swift action is an attack.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Weird RAW thought, what does immeadietly mean? Obviously not immeadiate action. Logically it must be a meta term meaning it's the next thing to happen at the table. Does this mean you can't recover manuevers if somebody else takes an immeadiate action after your swift since that was what happened imeadiatly after your swift action rather than your melee attack. What if Pizza arrives and you get up to answer the door before rolling dice for your attack?

/end bad meta-game/language joke.

[MeeposFire]

Hand of Vecna said that it was a full attack to recover maneuvers as a warblade. It's a swift, followed by a standard action to either flourish your weapon (actually part of the text!) or make an attack.

It says you need an attack not necessarily the specific attack action. The book even defines the term attack broadly later in the book to include things that cause saving throws and the like (not that you are likely to do that without using a maneuver).

[Greenish]

You only decide whether to use a standard action attack or a full attack after the first swing (assuming you haven't used your move action for the round yet), so even if rest of the full attack somehow isn't "melee attack", the first one should be, since it's the same thing wether you later decide to keep attacking or to move away.

[MeeposFire]

You only decide whether to use a standard action attack or a full attack after the first swing (assuming you haven't used your move action for the round yet), so even if rest of the full attack somehow isn't "melee attack", the first one should be, since it's the same thing wether you later decide to keep attacking or to move away.

This is true though it is odd if you think about it. If you wield two weapons but do not use the second weapon to get an extra attack you don't take a -2 penalty to all attacks (such as making an attack action) but if you decide to do a full attack you take a -2 to all attacks. So either you have to take the -2 penalty first just in case you decide to full attack, or you do you take the attack action first and then apply the penalty retroactively when you decide to full attack which is strange. Personally I think you need to choose before hand in this case.

[darkdragoon]

Further, Diamond Mind has Moment of Alacrity as an initiative hax and Stance of Alacrity for action economy breakage. I don't doubt Crusader would love those. And One with Shadow is an insanely good counter from Shadow Hand and Shadow Blink is likewise exceedingly useful. And Iron Heart Surge has tons upon tons of uses (one of the best ways not to get mauled by Anti-Magic Fields, for one). Crusader is fine but to say they wouldn't benefit of the rest of the schools is...hard to believe.

This is a Crusader. You cannot assume they will automatically have that maneuver ready. Adaptive Style is no guarantee either, and the cost of multiple feats to do so makes it even less likely.

RKV already has Shadow Hand and spells; Martial Study for them is roasting small countries or throwing people like Mr. T for lulz.