ToB bookeeping alternatives

[TroubleBrewing]

I'm DMing a game tonight with players who have a decent amount of 3.5 experience, but no "fringe D&D" experience. I'm requiring each of the players to select a base class from either the ToB, a psionic class, MoI, or Binder.

I understand that multiclassing with multiple martial adept classes can be challenging, and I was wondering if there is a way to streamline the bookeeping required for multiple maneuver tables.

[The-Mage-King]

1) Use these (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a).
2) Keep them in seperate stacks for each martial adept class.
3) ???
4) PROFIT!!!1!

[TroubleBrewing]

Well, would you look at that.

Thanks a bunch!

[Keld Denar]

Its only really confusing when you are creating the character, assuming you are starting above 1st level. I prefer to create a table. Just sketch something on the back of a piece of paper with columns and rows and whatnot.

{table=head]Lvl|Class|Warb IL|Crus IL|Manuver Gain|Manuever Lost|Stance
1|Warb1|1|0|X,Y,Z||Stance
2|Crus1|1.5|1|P,Q,R,S,T||Stance
[/table]
etc.

[TroubleBrewing]

At 2nd, wouldn't your warblade initiator level be 2, though?

I thought only non-initiator class levels counted as 1/2.

[The-Mage-King]

At 2nd, wouldn't your warblade initiator level be 2, though?

I thought only non-initiator class levels counted as 1/2.

They do.


A better way to phrase what Keld is saying is "Each class that isn't the initiator class that you're calculating the IL of counts a 1/2 an IL." So a Warblade 1/Crusader 2 is IL 2 in each, because Crusader counts as 1/2 an IL for Warblade, and vice versa.

[Greenish]

At 2nd, wouldn't your warblade initiator level be 2, though?

I thought only non-initiator class levels counted as 1/2.Each initiator class only counts as full IL for itself. See ToB page 39.

[Hiro Protagonest]

At 2nd, wouldn't your warblade initiator level be 2, though?

I thought only non-initiator class levels counted as 1/2.


They do.


A better way to phrase what Keld is saying is "Each class that isn't the initiator class that you're calculating the IL of counts a 1/2 an IL." So a Warblade 1/Crusader 2 is IL 2 in each, because Crusader counts as 1/2 an IL for Warblade, and vice versa.
You're both wrong.

Each initiator class only counts as full IL for itself. See ToB page 39.

You're right.

[Big Fau]

You should be more worried about the MoI players. That's a hellish amount of bookkeeping. If you have even a mild understand of Microsoft Excel, this spreadsheet (http://www.sendspace.com/file/a9d1ms) will be invaluable to you and your Meldshaping players.

[Greenish]

You're both wrong.TMK's numbers are correct, it's just confusing since he's talking about warblade1/crusader2, unlike Keld's example.

[Zaq]

You should be more worried about the MoI players. That's a hellish amount of bookkeeping. If you have even a mild understand of Microsoft Excel, this spreadsheet (http://www.sendspace.com/file/a9d1ms) will be invaluable to you and your Meldshaping players.

As someone who's playing an Incarnate, I respectfully disagree. Just make some cards with your most commonly shaped melds on 'em (if you have the time, make cards for all the melds on your list, but who has time for that?). List the viable chakras for each meld, then write out the shape effect and the bind effect(s). Make a little box to represent it being bound (and, if you have that feat, one to represent it being Expanded). Then just pick the melds you use, get a bunch of tokens to represent your essentia, and get some differently colored tokens or some paperclips to represent binds and Expandedness. Voila, done.

Compared with my last couple characters, my Incarnate feels like no bookkeeping at all. The character before this one was a Spirit Shaman, and you don't KNOW how bad that bookkeeping was . . . and before that was a DFA, and while DFAs don't have anything to prep every day, they do have to keep track of all the different little fiddly effects they're slinging around ("OK, the goblin's slowed for two turns, entangled for three turns, and weakened for three turns. The hobgoblin's only slowed for one turn, also entangled for three turns, weakened for one turn, taking ongoing electric damage for four turns, shaken for four turns, and I think that's it. The second hobgoblin is . . ."), which was, while fun, definitely something that took a lot of attention. My Incarnate, though? I just glance down at where my essentia is, and I know exactly what I'm capable of. It's about as simple as you can get and still keep my interest.

So no, I really, really disagree with the assertion that incarnum takes a lot of bookkeeping. The one complex (as in, if I don't prep what I want before the game starts, I'm going to make the rest of the group wait) incarnum-based character I've ever played was a Binder/Incarnate/Chameleon who had like four or five separate sets of abilities to prep every day, but the incarnum was hardly the worst offender in that case.

[Blue Bandit]

1) Use these (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a).
2) Keep them in seperate stacks for each martial adept class.
3) ???
4) PROFIT!!!1!

I wish this thread existed a year or so ago. It would of saved me a whole lot of trouble when I made my own cards by hand. Thanks for pointing this out.:smallcool:

[Rejakor]

Meldshaping is easy. Pick your melds, have a piece of paper with tally marks to keep track of your essentia.

[Big Fau]

As someone who's playing an Incarnate, I respectfully disagree. Just make some cards with your most commonly shaped melds on 'em (if you have the time, make cards for all the melds on your list, but who has time for that?). List the viable chakras for each meld, then write out the shape effect and the bind effect(s). Make a little box to represent it being bound (and, if you have that feat, one to represent it being Expanded). Then just pick the melds you use, get a bunch of tokens to represent your essentia, and get some differently colored tokens or some paperclips to represent binds and Expandedness. Voila, done.

Compared with my last couple characters, my Incarnate feels like no bookkeeping at all. The character before this one was a Spirit Shaman, and you don't KNOW how bad that bookkeeping was . . . and before that was a DFA, and while DFAs don't have anything to prep every day, they do have to keep track of all the different little fiddly effects they're slinging around ("OK, the goblin's slowed for two turns, entangled for three turns, and weakened for three turns. The hobgoblin's only slowed for one turn, also entangled for three turns, weakened for one turn, taking ongoing electric damage for four turns, shaken for four turns, and I think that's it. The second hobgoblin is . . ."), which was, while fun, definitely something that took a lot of attention. My Incarnate, though? I just glance down at where my essentia is, and I know exactly what I'm capable of. It's about as simple as you can get and still keep my interest.

So no, I really, really disagree with the assertion that incarnum takes a lot of bookkeeping. The one complex (as in, if I don't prep what I want before the game starts, I'm going to make the rest of the group wait) incarnum-based character I've ever played was a Binder/Incarnate/Chameleon who had like four or five separate sets of abilities to prep every day, but the incarnum was hardly the worst offender in that case.

That's if you keep the same list of melds every day, and only change one or two every now and then. When you switch more than that, the spreadsheet is really useful.