How do Warblade maneuvers work?

[Talakeal]

I have seen a LOT of posts recently saying you should replace the fighter with a warblade in your games and the ensuing arguments. I had stopped playing D&D by the time the book came out, and it was out of print by the time I started again, so I have never actually seen the book myself.

So my question is, is the warblade actually a "mundane" characters, or is it just a magic user dressed up with melee based descriptions of its powers?

How do the maneuvers actually work? Are they vancien, or power points like psionics, are they 1/encounter like 4E fighters, are they recharge like 4E monsters or what? Likewise can you only know so many maneuvers at a time and then forget your old ones as you level?

[Sinfonian]

Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2)'s the whole class for you.

Martial adepts, of all kinds, are more useful than the standard classes for several reasons. They can do plenty with just a standard action, which was a serious problem for Core melee. They've got quite a bit of versatility in being able to contribute in out-of-combat situations. This does make them more like casters, yes, but I think they have a unique feel to them (Crusaders even moreso than the other two).

Edit: As stated below, encounters start with maneuvers ready to use, similar to 4E. It's commonly believed that this system was the dry-run for 4E's system. However, they are expended after each use, but you can refresh them (in a Warblade's case by attacking + swift action) as the fight goes along.

[Telasi]

They're 1/encounter. The difference from 4e encounter powers is that it only costs a Warblade 1 swift action followed by an attack, full attack, or no action to recharge them all. Warblades know only a few maneuvers, but gain new ones as they level, and can retrain old ones similarly to a sorcerer.

As for your other questions, Warblades are the most mundane of the three ToB classes; none of their maneuvers are overtly supernatural, though they are frequently superhuman.

[Eldariel]

I have seen a LOT of posts recently saying you should replace the fighter with a warblade in your games and the ensuing arguments. I had stopped playing D&D by the time the book came out, and it was out of print by the time I started again, so I have never actually seen the book myself.

So my question is, is the warblade actually a "mundane" characters, or is it just a magic user dressed up with melee based descriptions of its powers?

How do the maneuvers actually work? Are they vancien, or power points like psionics, are they 1/encounter like 4E fighters, are they recharge like 4E monsters or what? Likewise can you only know so many maneuvers at a time and then forget your old ones as you level?

Warblade is a mundane character. Basically, at the beginning of each encounter you have all your maneuvers readied (each maneuver can only be readied once; either you're ready to use it or you're not). Using one expends it. Then you can spend a swift action followed by a normal attack or standard action to do nothing in order to recover all your maneuvers (think of it as basically needing to reposition yourself to enable executing it again; that's the book-given suggestion). So basically unlimited access to all of them but small action tax to reuse the old ones.

You know a certain number of maneuvers and you can have about half of them readied for any single encounter. You can change them up outside combat, or with a feat you can spend a full-round action to switch your readied maneuvers (and recover all the expended ones while at it) in combat.


Thankfully, Wizards also published Warblade as a free web preview on their site:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2

And ToB maneuver descriptions as Maneuver Cards (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a) (don't contain the details of course; for that you need the book but there's enough material to play with them more or less; you gain new maneuver levels at the same rate as a caster gains new spell levels, that is 1st level maneuvers on level 1, 2nd on level 3, 3rd on level 5 and so on - and non-ToB classes count ½ towards your initiator level so Fighter 4/Warblade 1 is level 3 initiator and gets 2nd level maneuvers)

[Cog]

...none of their maneuvers are overtly supernatural, though they are frequently superhuman.
Keep in mind that Fighters themselves are pretty superhuman by 6th level or so.

A lot of what Warblades can do looks pretty fancy, and between that and the mechanical similarity between maneuvers and spells, there are some who consider even Warblades to be magical. However, just as many people see those extraordinary abilities as drawing from reserves of will, sheer martial skill, and other such non-magical sources.

[Hiro Protagonest]

They're 1/encounter. The difference from 4e encounter powers is that it only costs a Warblade 1 swift action followed by an attack, full attack, or no action to recharge them all.

These sentences contradict each other. It's not 1/encounter if you can recharge it multiple times. I have ToB, and none of the martial adepts have maneuvers only once per encounter.

[Boci]

The two most problematic maneuvres (barring in mind these are both level 8, i.e. 15th level character) are:

Lightning throw: Which involves throwing your weapon in a 60ft line, hitting all creatures and then having it return to your hand.

Earthstrike Quake: Cause a local earthquake.

Neither are vital options for a warblade (I believe they are both rated average in the class's guide) and I can see why some people insist that they should be supernatural, even though a feholder flying isn't. In any case, its a pretty minor issue, since anti-magic fields are generally rare.

[Terazul]

Pretty much every maneuver a warblade naturally has access to comes down to: "Hit that guy", "Hit that guy and break his nose or something (Status effect)", "Hit a couple guys", or "BY CROM".

They're all completely nonmagical, extraordinary effects. The two maneuvers that could go against this (and are often overly complained about) are A) Lightning Throw, an 8th level Maneuver (available at 15th level, when you have long left the realm of mortal men), that throws your weapon dealing damage in a 30 foot line because you're just that good,

and B) Iron Heart Surge, which is more or less BY CROM!, and just breaking out of statuses by sheer force of will (though it needs a little rewrite to make it function as intended).

But anything else is just tactical inspiration, clever positioning, or just up and hitting a dude.

Edit; Swordsaged on Lightning Throw, but also Earthquake Strike -- The "hit the earth so hard it breaks open" is a classic though.

[Boci]

Pretty much every maneuver a warblade naturally has access to comes down to: "Hit that guy", "Hit that guy and break his nose or something (Status effect)", "Hit a couple guys", or "BY CROM".

They're all completely nonmagical, extraordinary effects. The two maneuvers that could go against this (and are often overly complained about) are A) Lightning Throw, an 8th level Maneuver (available at 15th level, when you have long left the realm of mortal men), that throws your weapon dealing damage in a 30 foot line because you're just that good,

I don't think anyone has that much of a problem with that, more the weapon returning to your hand afterwards.


and B) Iron Heart Surge, which is more or less BY CROM!, and just breaking out of statuses by sheer force of will (though it needs a little rewrite to make it function as intended).

This one gets fleck for being vague. I don't think many people have a problem with the concept of a warrior shacking off certain stasus effects.

[Telasi]

Keep in mind that Fighters themselves are pretty superhuman by 6th level or so.

A lot of what Warblades can do looks pretty fancy, and between that and the mechanical similarity between maneuvers and spells, there are some who consider even Warblades to be magical. However, just as many people see those extraordinary abilities as drawing from reserves of will, sheer martial skill, and other such non-magical sources.

Yep, that's true. It's just a bit more blatantly obvious with Warblade maneuvers. Time Stands Still, for example, or the gemstone Nightmare Blades. (Two full attacks in one round; Concentration checks for various effects on your attack.)

The major advantage a Warblade has over a Fighter is ease of use. It's really not hard to pick decent maneuvers; certainly easier than choosing good feats on a Fighter. Many maneuvers also do what a Fighter would do with a feat, but better in that the maneuver has no downside other than the usage limitation (which isn't much of a limit, in my experience).

While Warblade and the other ToB classes are good, I would warn you against using them in a campaign with standard classes. They will quickly overshadow any other character attempting to fill the same role, which isn't any fun for the other player. ToB is just that much more powerful than standard melee. Just make sure ToB is fine with everyone else before pulling it out, and you shouldn't have problems.


These sentences contradict each other. It's not 1/encounter if you can recharge it multiple times. I have ToB, and none of the martial adepts have maneuvers only once per encounter.

Not really. The maneuvers are usable once per encounter unless you take the action to recharge them. The fact that they made it trivial to do so doesn't mean they're not still essentially encounter powers. By the same logic, Fighters, Rangers, and Rogues in 4e don't have encounter powers because they're able to regain the use encounter powers through various means during battle. Let alone the Demigod ED.

I chose the wording I did because the OP referred to the very similar 4e encounter power mechanic. If he hadn't, I could have phrased it differently, but this way is easier to understand to people who play both 4e and 3.5.

[Boci]

While Warblade and the other ToB classes are good, I would warn you against using them in a campaign with standard classes. They will quickly overshadow any other character attempting to fill the same role, which isn't any fun for the other player. ToB is just that much more powerful than standard melee. Just make sure ToB is fine with everyone else before pulling it out, and you shouldn't have problems.

ToB comes pre-optimized. If the group are good at it then core classes wil lstill be able to compete by the virtue of having higher numbers. I personally find this dull, but from a power perpective each class will have its strengths and weaknesses.

Its like a damaged AK47 and a glock. The former (optimized fighter) has a higher damage potential, but cannot always be used to full effect, the latter (optimized warblade) however consistently delivers, evewn if its damage is lower.

[AslanCross]

For the record, I still think ToB can actually redeem the core melee classes instead of supplanting them. ToB multiclasses extremely well and can benefit somewhat from being mixed with core classes. A Dungeoncrasher Fighter/Warblade can do extremely well at bull-rushing AND other things (as opposed to a Dungeoncrasher Fighter who needs to bull rush to feel effective).

[Talya]

While Warblade and the other ToB classes are good, I would warn you against using them in a campaign with standard classes. They will quickly overshadow any other character attempting to fill the same role, which isn't any fun for the other player. ToB is just that much more powerful than standard melee. Just make sure ToB is fine with everyone else before pulling it out, and you shouldn't have problems.

Don't forget, the fighter, monk, paladin, and ranger by default already get used in campaigns with wizard, cleric, druid, and sorcerer. All of these are "Standard classes." Warblades and other TOB classes fall between the two groups in power (Right around where bards are, actually.)

[sonofzeal]

So my question is, is the warblade actually a "mundane" characters, or is it just a magic user dressed up with melee based descriptions of its powers?
Mundane. Or, let's break it down...

Flavour: Mundane. The descriptions of Warblade given in the book don't suggest anything magical or supernatural. They're just really really good at kicking ass and chewing bubblegum, and they're all out of gum.

Crunch: Semi-magical. It's easiest to explain maneuvers in terms of spells, as there's a clear parallel there in acquisition rate, and the whole "maneuvers known" mechanic. Most descriptions attempting to explain it to a newb will draw analogies to magic at least once.

Gameplay: Mundane. I've written more about this previously, but basically the key gameplay difference between mundane and magical is resource management; magical characters have far more resources that can be expended and have to be parcelled out carefully, while mundane characters tend to be all-out, all the time. Martial Adepts fall pretty heavily into the latter category - charge the enemy the first round, lay out your biggest hits as fast as you can, and don't worry about conserving resources except in special circumstances. When you play them, they "feel" mundane.


How do the maneuvers actually work? Are they vancien, or power points like psionics, are they 1/encounter like 4E fighters, are they recharge like 4E monsters or what? Likewise can you only know so many maneuvers at a time and then forget your old ones as you level?
They're somewhat between "1/encounter" and "recharge". The default starts at the former, but then chances are you'll get special ways to recharge if needed. I think of them as per-encounter, myself.

You can only know so many maneuvers at a time. Every couple levels you can choose to "forget" an old one to gain a new one, but at that point it's generally one you aren't even using any more. Since you can only Ready a finite number, which is almost invariably less than the number you Know, you'll generally be forgetting the stuff you haven't Readied in months, or be upgrading it to one that's similar but superior in some way, and either way the progression seems pretty natural.

[Talakeal]

That doesn't sound so bad, I wish they went with that system for 4E. Thanks for the infor, maybe I will track down the book next time I play.

[Lateral]

Edit; Swordsaged on Lightning Throw, but also Earthquake Strike -- The "hit the earth so hard it breaks open" is a classic though.

Earthstrike Quake, not Earthquake Strike. (What the hell, WotC?!)

[Telasi]

ToB comes pre-optimized. If the group are good at it then core classes wil lstill be able to compete by the virtue of having higher numbers. I personally find this dull, but from a power perpective each class will have its strengths and weaknesses.

Its like a damaged AK47 and a glock. The former (optimized fighter) has a higher damage potential, but cannot always be used to full effect, the latter (optimized warblade) however consistently delivers, evewn if its damage is lower.

You have to be pretty good at building to make a fighter keep up with a warblade, let alone pass them. I've been there, and it's not trivial. So yes, you're right, but not everybody is able or willing to pull it off.


Don't forget, the fighter, monk, paladin, and ranger by default get used in a game with wizard, cleric, druid, and sorcerer. All of these are "Standard classes. Warblades and other TOB classes fall between the two groups in power (Right around where bards are, actually.)

I'm going to go ahead and argue a bit here. On the few occasions when I've had the misfortune to participate in a game in which ToB gets used alongside regular melee, the people playing regular melee end up frustrated, and much more so than I've ever seen as a result of casters in the party. The main difference is that casters tend to (not always, but often) do different things than the melee people, so the melee folks feel the difference less because their niche isn't being destroyed. The fact that ToB classes are only Tier 3 and not Tier 1 or 2 doesn't mean they can't cause problems.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind ToB, and I certainly don't think it's inherently broken or anything. I'm just pointing out problems that can come up if people aren't careful.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Ahem, I have something to say.

Maneuvers are not 1/encounter, there is a big difference between 1/encounter and the ability to recharge them!!!
Thank you for listening.

[sonofzeal]

Ahem, I have something to say.

Maneuvers are not 1/encounter, there is a big difference between 1/encounter and the ability to recharge them!!!
Thank you for listening.
Oh please.

They're "1/encounter with exceptions". That's the easiest way of thinking about them. They're far more similar to "encounter powers" than to "at-wills" or "dailies". They can't be used every single round, they recharge between encounters, and even if they've got a recovery mechanism, the fundamental nature is still of a per-encounter ability.

If a 4e Warlord had an ability that restored an ally's expended encounter power, would you still refer to them as encounter powers even if they could theoretically be used more than once per encounter?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Oh please.

They're "1/encounter with exceptions". That's the easiest way of thinking about them. They're far more similar to "encounter powers" than to "at-wills" or "dailies". They can't be used every single round, they recharge between encounters, and even if they've got a recovery mechanism, the fundamental nature is still of a per-encounter ability.

If a 4e Warlord had an ability that restored an ally's expended encounter power, would you still refer to them as encounter powers even if they could theoretically be used more than once per encounter?

One warlord ability, compared to the fact that it only takes a swift action and an attack for warblades to recover maneuvers? "Usable only every other round" sound closer to at-will than encounter, unless your fights typically last only two rounds.

[Sir Homeslice]

If a 4e Warlord had an ability that restored an ally's expended encounter power, would you still refer to them as encounter powers even if they could theoretically be used more than once per encounter?

They do, and it's called Bolt of Genius. And 4e encounter powers are still encounter powers, even with the addition of power jewels and salves of power.

[Talya]

I would argue Crusaders do not have encounter powers.

Warblades and Swordsages do.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I would argue Crusaders do not have encounter powers.

Warblades and Swordsages do.

Sure, warblades and swordsages have encounter powers, if you call two rounds an encounter.

[Boci]

You have to be pretty good at building to make a fighter keep up with a warblade, let alone pass them. I've been there, and it's not trivial. So yes, you're right, but not everybody is able or willing to pull it off.

Ditto on willing, but as far as able goes, there's always the internet.

[Heatwizard]

Ahem, I have something to say.

Gratuitously oversized text
Thank you for listening.

Alright;
A: We heard you the first time.
B: No. They're readied at the beginning of the encounter, and you can use them exactly once before they are expended, and you can't use them. The fact that you can reload doesn't make the terminology invalid.

Not that it really even matters, though.

[Veyr]

Keep in mind that Fighters themselves are pretty superhuman by 6th level or so.
1st, actually. Barbarians more so, thanks to Fast Movement.

I do agree with Swiftmongoose that there is a difference between Encounter Powers and what ToB has. I don't think it's a big enough difference to cry foul when someone describes them as per-encounter powers or whatever, but the recovery mechanic (and specifically how easy it is to use) is an important distinction for ToB vs. 4E. It does change a lot of things.

Encounter powers still need to be somewhat rationed, especially at low levels. Tome of Battle maneuvers do not.

[Lateral]

1st, actually. Barbarians more so, thanks to Fast Movement.

...With fast movement and a 30 foot land speed, you're moving approximately four miles per hour. Even for long-distance, full-round travel, it's only eight miles per hour. Fast, sure. Superhuman, it ain't.

[Veyr]

...With fast movement and a 30 foot land speed, you're moving approximately four miles per hour. Even for long-distance, full-round travel, it's eight miles per hour. Fast, sure. Superhuman, it ain't.
A Human Barbarian 1 with the Run and Endurance feats can keep up better-than-world-record sprint speeds for about five times as long as the races in which those records were set, IIRC (been a while since I ran the numbers; point is that it was just about the record sprint speed set by Usain Bolt and lasted for over a minute and a half or something). More, if he's Raging.

And all this while wearing a chain shirt and wielding an enormous two-handed axe.

Yes, that is far better than any real human being could ever do.

[Big Fau]

I'm going to go ahead and argue a bit here. On the few occasions when I've had the misfortune to participate in a game in which ToB gets used alongside regular melee, the people playing regular melee end up frustrated, and much more so than I've ever seen as a result of casters in the party. The main difference is that casters tend to (not always, but often) do different things than the melee people, so the melee folks feel the difference less because their niche isn't being destroyed. The fact that ToB classes are only Tier 3 and not Tier 1 or 2 doesn't mean they can't cause problems.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind ToB, and I certainly don't think it's inherently broken or anything. I'm just pointing out problems that can come up if people aren't careful.

This is because they expect spellcasting to be world-shaping, because that's how it is in mythology.

Then they see the Warblade and think "It's a Swashbuckler with more class features and psuedo-bonus feats". This throws them off when the Warblade IHS's a Web spell, or WRT's the party's Wizard, or uses Swooping Dragon Strike, or deals 2d6 Con with a single attack.

It messes with them because they expect the Warblade to be only a little better than a Fighter.


I've had a similar experience, but with a Warblade to the party Druid's Animal Companion.

[sonofzeal]

One warlord ability, compared to the fact that it only takes a swift action and an attack for warblades to recover maneuvers? "Usable only every other round" sound closer to at-will than encounter, unless your fights typically last only two rounds.
Eh, you can use a single maneuver every other round, but that means half=wasting the one in between since you can't full-attack or use any other maneuver during it. That's usually a bad trade.

Either way, the fundamental mechanic is still "1/encounter with exceptions". It's up to your game how common those exceptions are, but in mine they're usually fairly rare. They're certainly not at-wills, even if you can get them back fairly quickly.

And I certainly don't understand why you feel the need to yell at us to tell us otherwise.




Also...

"How do Warblade maneuvers work?"

"MAGNETS (http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/046/123/original/magnets.jpg?1270937748)!"

(It certainly explains a few things...)

[The-Mage-King]

Um... Zeal, you can full attack when refreshing. You just need to be in the right place to do so- that is to say, next to your target(s).

[sonofzeal]

Um... Zeal, you can full attack when refreshing. You just need to be in the right place to do so- that is to say, next to your target(s).
I read "a melee attack" to mean "a single melee attack", not "several melee attacks", since it decidedly uses the singular case. If that's been cleared up in Errata (HAH!), let me know.

[Divide by Zero]

I read "a melee attack" to mean "a single melee attack", not "several melee attacks", since it decidedly uses the singular case. If that's been cleared up in Errata (HAH!), let me know.

But it never says what you can do with the rest of your action. A melee attack followed by more melee attacks is still a melee attack.

[sonofzeal]

But it never says what you can do with the rest of your action. A melee attack followed by more melee attacks is still a melee attack.
I'll grant it's ambiguous. I always assumed RAI was a single attack, but I'll agree RAW does allow for a full attack.

[Draz74]

I've always thought it was RAI as well, since it more or less guarantees that the Warblade will, at least occasionally, do the basic whack-whack-whack thing instead of executing fancy moves (Strikes. You could almost think of a single attack to refresh maneuvers being a specific extra kind of Strike).

[Big Fau]

I read "a melee attack" to mean "a single melee attack", not "several melee attacks", since it decidedly uses the singular case. If that's been cleared up in Errata (HAH!), let me know.

And IHS can put out the sun. :smalltongue:

[sonofzeal]

And IHS can put out the sun. :smalltongue:
MAGNETS! (http://rlv.zcache.com/magnets_how_do_they_work_tshirt-p235829187121025555t5tr_400.jpg)

[Talya]

I've always thought it was RAI as well, since it more or less guarantees that the Warblade will, at least occasionally, do the basic whack-whack-whack thing instead of executing fancy moves (Strikes. You could almost think of a single attack to refresh maneuvers being a specific extra kind of Strike).

In my experience, a warblade does this far more than occasionally.

[Darth Stabber]

There is a thread discussing a possible new FAQ, and the topic of the old "melee can't have nice things" attitude. I hate quoting myself, but if you do have access to ToB and ban it, the point is pertinent.

Spoilered due to length


Mundane melee outside of ToB is forced to make a very tough decision. When creating a character you can either be really good at one thing, or crappy at a number of things. A caster's hands are not so tightly bound. If a caster wants to deal a butt load of damage he might pick up a menagerie of metamagic reducers, and metamagic feats and prepare a bunch of empowered twinned repeating sonic orbs, whereas mr. Fighter/Barbarian will grab power attack, shocktrooper, leap attack, and some levels in PRCs that specifically support that. Now if we put the characters in a situation that does not allow their primary tactic, the caster is still a caster, and if he has a brain in his head his spell selection will be diverse enough that he can contribute something. Whereas if the warrior can't charge he is effectively removed from the encounter. If the warrior decides he wants to be able to charge and trip so he can contribute in a wider variety of encounters, he will not be very good at either since those 2 specialities have entirely different feat trees and utilize a somewhat different set up of classes. Casters just use different spells. ToB allows you to be good at multiple things. Now, while you may not like the way ToB resolves mundane melee's crippling overspecialization problem, it is the ONLY official material that solves it. Banning it is like not going to the only hospital in town when your leg is broken because you don't like the wallpaper.

[Partysan]

While in a very technical sense maneuvers can be considered encounter powers I'd argue that an ability that's rechargable at will is pretty much an at-will ability in itself.

[Darth Stabber]

While in a very technical sense maneuvers can be considered encounter powers I'd argue that an ability that's rechargable at will is pretty much an at-will ability in itself.

Warblade recharge is easy, but at will implies constant availability. Could we settle on @need?

Swordsages are true per encounter (though thwy can get them back, it's a pain in the butt without feat investment)

Crusaders theoretically have the best recharge mechanic (requiring no action), but ultimately I don't really like the randomness of it. (Since they literally regain maneuvers at random)

[Warlawk]

Crusaders theoretically have the best recharge mechanic (requiring no action), but ultimately I don't really like the randomness of it. (Since they literally regain maneuvers at random)

Have you actually tried playing one though? Did you use maneuver cards that could be shuffled and dealt when you played? Different strokes for different folks of course... but my dwarven tank crusader was mechanically the most fun character I have played since 3.0 was released. The randomness just means you have to approach your selection of readied maneuvers very carefully.

[Terazul]

Have you actually tried playing one though? Did you use maneuver cards that could be shuffled and dealt when you played? Different strokes for different folks of course... but my dwarven tank crusader was mechanically the most fun character I have played since 3.0 was released. The randomness just means you have to approach your selection of readied maneuvers very carefully.

Yeah, between Maneuver Cards (for ease of randomness), and Extra Granted Maneuver, you honestly don't notice it that much. In fact, you'll always start with only two of your maneuvers unavailable out of your pile of awesome, and you'll get one of them next round.

[Veyr]

Yeah, between Maneuver Cards (for ease of randomness), and Extra Granted Maneuver, you honestly don't notice it that much. In fact, you'll always start with only two of your maneuvers unavailable out of your pile of awesome, and you'll get one of them next round.
I actually retrained my Crusader's Extra Granted Maneuver; it just didn't seem to be a big enough advantage most of the time. The randomization thing really isn't a problem for Crusaders, IMO. "A random choice from a list of awesome is still awesome."