tome of battle

[Bloodymango]

my group doesnt allow any thing out of this book, so i never really had any interest in reading it. i took a quick glance at it a little wile ago and noticed all the classes had maneuvers and stances. can you fine fellows and madams plz explain what they are and how they work to me

[gkathellar]

Tome of Battle is the best thing ever done for melee, giving warriors access to Disciplines (Schools) of Maneuvers (Melee Spells) and Stances (Passive Effects) that up their power level to about Tier 3 and make them far more useful, versatile, tactically complex and interesting to play.

[Arundel]

Oh no.

I am going to get in this thread quick then turn and run.

Tome of Battle (ToB) was a late run 3.5 book that sought to give melee a greater array of powerful options to compete with the insane dominance of Casters in (high OP) play. The maneuvers and stances are [roughlykindamaybesimilarlynotatall] equivalent to spell like abilities and give melee something very effective to do that isn't full attack or charging builds.

Warning: This book has a great many detractors for a great many reasons, which may or may not be valid reasons. Examples include (but are IN NO WAY limited to): Too much anime, not enough anime, melee gets nice things, melee doesn't get nice things, melee isn't fighter anymore, etc.

[OracleofWuffing]

Generally speaking, there are strike maneuvers which carry additional effects to a single attack, and boost maneuvers that allow you to quickly buff yourself without using your move or standard actions. Stances are basically near-permanent buffs on yourself that last until you end the stance or switch to a different stance.

Warblades and Swordsages ready an amount of maneuvers from a list of maneuvers that they already know, kind of sort of like a Wizard preparing spells except they prepare much more quickly and are pretty much expected to redo it in between battles. Once a maneuver is used, you can't use it again until after the encounter is over, or until you use your class's recover mechanic (Swordsages can spend a full action to recover 1 used maneuver, Warblades use a swift action to recover all their expended maneuvers).

Crusaders pick what maneuvers they know, but they can only use the maneuvers that have been granted to them from the list of maneuvers they know- their maneuvers are granted at random. They start with 2 granted maneuvers before their turn in combat, then gain 1 maneuver every round until they have no more to gain, at which point they "reset" to 2 granted maneuvers.

Edit: There are also feats that allow classes that were made outside of Tome of Battle to pick up maneuvers and stances.

[Zale]

I wonder how many posts until this dissolves into an argument. :smallconfused:

[TroubleBrewing]

It's gotten farther than any other ToB thread thusfar. :smalltongue:

[Starbuck_II]

my group doesnt allow any thing out of this book, so i never really had any interest in reading it. i took a quick glance at it a little wile ago and noticed all the classes had maneuvers and stances. can you fine fellows and madams plz explain what they are and how they work to me

Well, there are three classes:
Swordsages: think magical Monk (technically already magical))/Rogues (invisibility/sneak attack/flanking)/Ranger (wilderness warriors) roles based on schools of maneivers taken. Wis boosts Class features.

Example School-Desert Wind: They can shoot mini fireballs, resist fire damage, flurry with a weapon, etc.

Crusaders: Paladin/Clerics role. Healing, bless, bash, etc. Cha booss class features.

Warblade: Only mundane of the group no matter what (you can choose nionmagical with swordsage or crusader but Warblade only has extraordinary manuevers).
They are basically Fighters (but instead of multiple feats have class features)/Barbarians/warriors.
They are intelligent warriors because class features boost having good INT bonus.


Than there are the maneuvers in alphabetical order. Each class has a few of them to choose from.
Warblades and Crusades don't get Desert Wind naturally.

There are Fighter bonus feats that add maneuvers (Martial Study/Martial stance) if you wanted to be a Fighter (or other class) and get 1 or 2 maneuvers instead of being a Martial Adept (name of class in book).

[Psyren]

Is it ToB Tuesday already? (Somewhere?)

@ OP: Read this (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=357.0)

[Hiro Protagonest]

Well, there are three classes:
Swordsages: think magical Monk (technically already magical))/Rogues (invisibility/sneak attack/flanking)/Ranger (wilderness warriors) roles based on schools of maneivers taken. Wis boosts Class features.

Example School-Desert Wind: They can shoot mini fireballs, resist fire damage, flurry with a weapon, etc.
Bad idea giving Desert Wind as an example discipline. It's the one most likely to make people think they're just spellcasters.

Warblade: Only mundane of the group no matter what (you can choose nionmagical with swordsage or crusader but Warblade only has extraordinary manuevers).

Crusader healing maneuvers are extraordinary. Before you say anything, fast healing is also extraordinary.


ToB arguments will erupt in... less than two hours.

[Tvtyrant]

ToB is very good at bringing melee up to Tier 3, but it doesn't get any further then that. Swordsages are IMO the strongest, and Crusaders are the weakest. ToB can be used to make mini-4E by stripping all of the mundane characters who just full attack out, and give everyone options (like Mountain Hammer! Or that one that throws people against ceilings!).

Honestly I wouldn't play a ToB character because I'm not that fond of the mechanics as they feel in play, but they work well and don't step on the toes of other Tier 3 classes mechanics.

[Hiro Protagonest]

ToB is very good at bringing melee up to Tier 3, but it doesn't get any further then that. Swordsages are IMO the strongest, and Crusaders are the weakest. ToB can be used to make mini-4E by stripping all of the mundane characters who just full attack out, and give everyone options (like Mountain Hammer! Or that one that throws people against ceilings!).

Honestly I wouldn't play a ToB character because I'm not that fond of the mechanics as they feel in play, but they work well and don't step on the toes of other Tier 3 classes mechanics.

Mini-4e? I suppose it's similar. But it's much different from 4e, and more realistic. IRL, if you keep spamming the same sword move (at-will Mountain Hammer?) the opponent will learn how to block it. You have to use different ones. It's different from 4e because 4e is strict once per encounter/day, while this is recharged with an action (or just recharged, in the case of crusaders).

[Tvtyrant]

Mini-4e? I suppose it's similar. But it's much different from 4e, and more realistic. IRL, if you keep spamming the same sword move (at-will Mountain Hammer?) the opponent will learn how to block it. You have to use different ones. It's different from 4e because 4e is strict once per encounter/day, while this is recharged with an action (or just recharged, in the case of crusaders).

I don't think its a bad thing honestly, this way you get to do interesting things frequently without being overpowering. I still like Binder, Psywarrior and Totemist more but that does not invalidate the ToB mechanics. Plus, it gave us Snap Kick!

[Hiro Protagonest]

I don't think its a bad thing honestly, this way you get to do interesting things frequently without being overpowering. I still like Binder, Psywarrior and Totemist more but that does not invalidate the ToB mechanics. Plus, it gave us Snap Kick!

Heh, yeah. Even if you don't allow ToB material, you should always allow Superior Unarmed Strike and Snap Kick. My monk isn't a monk or a swordsage, he's a TWF ranger with superior unarmed strike who prepared magic fang/greater magic fang and water walk.

[TehLivingDeath]

Has anyone suggested "play CoDzilla out of spite" yet?

[Godskook]

ToB is very good at bringing melee up to Tier 3, but it doesn't get any further then that. Swordsages are IMO the strongest, and Crusaders are the weakest.

Swordsages have mobility better than the other two, and better saves than the Crusader, but that's mostly it. Crusaders can dish out significant amounts of damage just as easily as the Swordsage, and are legitimately more tanky. They also have significantly stronger BFC from Iron Guard's Glare and Thicket of Blades. The classes are close enough that I really don't think you can legitimately designate a 'strongest' or 'weakest'

[Drachasor]

Mini-4e? I suppose it's similar. But it's much different from 4e, and more realistic. IRL, if you keep spamming the same sword move (at-will Mountain Hammer?) the opponent will learn how to block it. You have to use different ones. It's different from 4e because 4e is strict once per encounter/day, while this is recharged with an action (or just recharged, in the case of crusaders).

I agree with ToB being better than 4E. It also has advantages in giving the player a lot more options at low levels, and the same or more at higher levels.


ToB is very much HIGH fantasy melee combat. That's its biggest plus and I think why some hate it. With ToB you can have non-magical warriors do some pretty crazy stunts (on the level of something Batman or a Badass Normal Superhero might do). It is possible to make a guy who is on a more "realistic" level with ToB, but easy to make one that isn't. Given how the classes ought to be balanced with people bending the fabric of reality, I think it is a good thing ToB takes melee fighters up to this level.

[Gavinfoxx]

I would like to point out that if you want to simulate real world renaissance era martial arts that involve using two handed swords in melee combat, the best way of doing that in the 3.5e system is clearly an Iron Heart Warblade; many of the maneuvers, stances, and counters of that school are incredibly similar to the sorts of descriptions that are in real world fechtbuchs (fight manuals) from when people fought with swords, both in flavor text and in the sorts of things that they do.

So yes, if your goal is to SIMULATE real world martial arts, Tome of Battle enables that. If your goal is crazy cinematic wushu style fantasy combat, Tome of Battle can do that too. It is really a great book that enables lots of interesting things to happen in D&D melee classes.

[Drachasor]

Agreed. One of the best parts to me is that there is very little optimization work needed, which other melee classes typically suffer heavily from.

[Cerlis]

the idea is that Melee classes can do their stuff all day and thus have limited power. SPell caster classes have limited abilities per day and thus powerful. further they are designed to rely upon each other (the wizard uses a fighter for trash, the fighter uses a wizard for AOE and dispelling) and while a fighting character can do everything (from bullrush, to disarm, to flank) , spell casting classes can only know so many abilities

However since anyone can do damage and use combat tactics (flanking for minor bonuses)

they decided in this suppliment to give melee people a way to use higher than normal damage output and combat boosts by limiting how many of theses boosts and damages they can use at a time (so many prepared a day) and how often they can do it(once per encounter till they recharge).

Thus by putting a less dramatic limiter (as in the once per day thing) on these abilities and by making them not that more powerful (most are still based off your regular damage output, so its still hard to do 100 dmg with a toothpick) they created a balanced but constant fun melee fighting system.

[navar100]

Swordsages have mobility better than the other two, and better saves than the Crusader, but that's mostly it. Crusaders can dish out significant amounts of damage just as easily as the Swordsage, and are legitimately more tanky. They also have significantly stronger BFC from Iron Guard's Glare and Thicket of Blades. The classes are close enough that I really don't think you can legitimately designate a 'strongest' or 'weakest'

Add in that swordsage is medium bab, d8 HD, and has terrible maneuver recovery, I rank swordsage the weakest. Warblade has the most efficient recovery method, but crusader makes up for his by the fact that he can use a maneuver every round. Warblade's weakness is he readies few maneuvers. He needs to rely a bit more on feats than the others for some combat prowess, not that there's anything wrong with that, especially if he focuses on Iron Heart.

[Drachasor]

I sort of felt reading it that there wasn't a good reason for the Swordsage to not have full BAB (from the standpoint of balance).

[Hanuman]

Tome of battle does the following things:

1) Shortens the tier gap with casters and melee

2) Gives melee better options than "I attack again."

3) Allows you to punch through ANYTHING.

I feel sorry for your group, but you could always just go dungeoncrasher chargefighter and crit them so hard they barf coins.


If you want payback, when its your turn to dm get all the players to be T1 casters and your DM has to play fighter or CW samurai.

[Alefiend]

... you could always just go dungeoncrasher chargefighter and crit them so hard they barf coins.

Nothing to add, just wanted to say this is awesome. Made me laugh when I needed to. I'd ask to use it in a sig, but it doesn't describe my approach at all.

[Godskook]

Add in that swordsage is medium bab, d8 HD, and has terrible maneuver recovery, I rank swordsage the weakest. Warblade has the most efficient recovery method, but crusader makes up for his by the fact that he can use a maneuver every round. Warblade's weakness is he readies few maneuvers. He needs to rely a bit more on feats than the others for some combat prowess, not that there's anything wrong with that, especially if he focuses on Iron Heart.

1.Crusaders have the most 'efficient' recovery method, recovering all maneuvers every couple of rounds without any action cost. Warblades have the most user friendly.

2.To reiterate my position that they're fairly equal, Swordsage also has the highest ability to 'nova' his maneuvers towards whatever goal he wants, 3 stats to damage rolls(Wis, Str, Dex), higher AC and touch AC, and he definitely goes first.


I sort of felt reading it that there wasn't a good reason for the Swordsage to not have full BAB (from the standpoint of balance).

"the class is already balanced" is a fairly compelling reason, I should think. On top of that, the thematic rule of 3.5 has been from start to finish that dex-based skill/finesse/flank types get medium BAB.

Besides, free weapon focus is like having 16 BAB, except for those few levels where the iteratives are different.

[Drachasor]

"the class is already balanced" is a fairly compelling reason, I should think. On top of that, the thematic rule of 3.5 has been from start to finish that dex-based skill/finesse/flank types get medium BAB.

Besides, free weapon focus is like having 16 BAB, except for those few levels where the iteratives are different.

So Rangers have 3/4 BAB? Or are you comparing it to Monks, one of the worst classes in the game? Rogues make a bit more sense since they have Sneak Attack, which can be huge, but the Swordsage? Eh, I don't see the justification from a balance perspective (and I guess you don't either, since you are arguing for it as a matter of tradition). As others have noted, they are the weakest class in the book, and giving them full BAB isn't going to make them better than the others.

[sonofzeal]

So Rangers have 3/4 BAB? Or are you comparing it to Monks, one of the worst classes in the game? Rogues make a bit more sense since they have Sneak Attack, which can be huge, but the Swordsage? Eh, I don't see the justification from a balance perspective (and I guess you don't either, since you are arguing for it as a matter of tradition). As others have noted, they are the weakest class in the book, and giving them full BAB isn't going to make them better than the others.
I dispute that Swordsages are the weakest class in the book. They're pretty solid across the board, and the vast gulf in "Maneuvers Readied" between them and Warblade makes that a reasonable comparison. With wis-to-AC in light armor, they should have comparable AC to heavy armor classes, or better if they really work that Wis. Really, my experience with Warblades has been a little mediocre. I find their limited array of Maneuvers Readied holds them back and limit their options. Take a couple Counters and IHS, and you might only have room for a single strike and that's it. The extra Maneuvers Readies of Swordsage give them a tone of additional freedom in throwing them around. The recovery mechanism sucks, sure, but you get enough that you shouldn't have to use it often anyway, and you can have a much broader array of maneuvers prepped to cover many more possibilities than the Warblade can.

I'm not arguing that the Swordsage is better than the Warblade (d12 HD, full BAB, and heavy armor are all nice), but I suspect people who call them the weakest of the three haven't actually played all of them much. I think the power level is close enough to make claims of "strongest" and "weakest" pretty meaningless. In this case I think it amounts to basically "favorite" and "least favorite". And I happen to rather like Swordsages, personally.



Good comparisons on 3/4 BAB classes: Rogues, Factotum, Bards, Beguilers, Scouts, etc. Rangers fit the pattern too, you're right, but nerfing the Ranger to 3/4 BAB would pretty much destroy the class as they really don't have much to begin with for combat.

[Drachasor]

I like Swordsages too, and I will grant that 5 BAB at 20th (since they don't really need multiple attacks -- and they'd pick up weapon focus anyhow, probably) would make it rather hard to notice any balance incongruity. That's kind of my point though, there's no particularly good reason that I see why they shouldn't have full BAB. It's a slight pet peeve of mine.

[sonofzeal]

Well, let's put it this way - 3/4 BAB melee classes are generally given the tools or other encouragements to be be more selective in when and how they engage, and should be seeking out other advantages (flanking, terrain, surprise, etc) that compensate nicely. Swordsages, especially ones with either Shadow Hand or Desert Wind, thoroughly fall into this category. It's the game's way of steering them away from front line melee (which they could still perform quite well) and into tactical skirmisher (which they also do quite well).

I'm just not going to get worked up about it either way. As much as it's sad to see any melee class with 3/4 BAB, the Swordsage wears it better than the Warblade or Crusader would.

[MeeposFire]

One thing to remember is that swordsages get enough maneuvers to use strikes for most or all of a combat along with boosts. Since most are used instead of full attacks your lack of BAB is mostly avoided.

[TroubleBrewing]

This has been astonishingly civil and well-informed thusfar. Keep up the good work, playground! :smallsmile:

I actually started a thread prior to my first read-through of ToB. It really was a serious game-changer for me in terms of character build philosophy. I love the book, and I do believe that those who ban it entirely simply have not read it thoroughly enough.

[Drachasor]

On a related note: I'm working on a more or less ToB-inspired version of Star Wars right now (some elements of 4th Edition and SW SAGA are in it). Once I am done with it, I plan on doing something for D&D. There are some ToB-inspired casters out there, but I haven't seen anyone try to redo the Wizard using a ToB-like system (e.g. each spell school is a discipline).

[Cerlis]

I think the reason the makers gave em 3/4 base attack bonus wasnt necessarily balance, but because they where designed as support fighters.

Rogues, monks, clerics, swordsages, all are designed to be melee fighters, but since their specialty goes other places they are (supposed) to be less tanky , even if its just cus they have low armor (actual armor, not AC). they arent the "guy who charges in first". Classes designed to be that guy have a higher hit dice and higher BAB because they are that guy.

in other words, Swordsage has 3/4 BAB because he's a "monk" not a "fighter"

[Tvtyrant]

The Swordsage knows almost double the number of maneuvers and can ready a similarly high amount then the other two, from a larger number of schools (not much larger, but still). I guess I shouldn't say stronger, but they are my favorite and I would definitely put them up there with the others in strength.

[huttj509]

I love the book, and I do believe that those who ban it entirely simply have not read it thoroughly enough.

Well, there are some perfectly good reasons to ban it entirely, they just tend to get drowned out in knee-jerk reactions.

For example, "only Bob has the book, and we really don't include sources that not everyone has convenient access to, especially if the GM's one of the people without, in order to familiarize himself with the material to be prepared to make rulings on it, include pertinent enemies, etc."

Decent social reason, I can understand that. If I were in the situation I might try to work out a compromise, question the "everyone needs access" ground rule, etc, but it's not an "OMG did you even read the book" type reason.

[TOZ]

I've played a couple ToB characters, one Warblade and one Swordsage. I'd like to play more, especially since these two were for all of one session apiece.

Since the Warblade was only first level, he felt little different from a normal greatsword Fighter. The Swordsage was level 4 and was much more interesting tactically.

[Terazul]

Well, there are some perfectly good reasons to ban it entirely, they just tend to get drowned out in knee-jerk reactions.

For example, "only Bob has the book, and we really don't include sources that not everyone has convenient access to, especially if the GM's one of the people without, in order to familiarize himself with the material to be prepared to make rulings on it, include pertinent enemies, etc."

Decent social reason, I can understand that. If I were in the situation I might try to work out a compromise, question the "everyone needs access" ground rule, etc, but it's not an "OMG did you even read the book" type reason.

Yeah, but I mean, just give the DM the book to borrow so he can read it? :smallconfused: The biggest thing is Maneuvers and those are available for free online. So's Warblade, though that leaves out the other two classes.

It just seems like a silly excuse.

[Coidzor]

Well, there are some perfectly good reasons to ban it entirely, they just tend to get drowned out in knee-jerk reactions.

For example, "only Bob has the book, and we really don't include sources that not everyone has convenient access to, especially if the GM's one of the people without, in order to familiarize himself with the material to be prepared to make rulings on it, include pertinent enemies, etc."

Decent social reason, I can understand that. If I were in the situation I might try to work out a compromise, question the "everyone needs access" ground rule, etc, but it's not an "OMG did you even read the book" type reason.

That's a good reason to you? :smallconfused: It's coherent, which is certainly a contrast with some of the arguments against I've heard in real life (and even from my own DM!), but it seems something that is so easily worked around that it should be a non-issue, ultimately.

[Psyren]

That's a good reason to you? :smallconfused:

I consider "the DM doesn't have the book" to be a perfectly good reason. And yes, it's easily remedied, but not necessarily in time for that session - which could easily turn into "that campaign" if the session in question is dedicated to character creation.

[Boci]

I consider "the DM doesn't have the book" to be a perfectly good reason.

Maybe I've just been spoilt by overacomidating DMs, but I've grown use to just being trusted to play the material well and inform them of what them about it on a need to know basis.

[Greenish]

they decided in this suppliment to give melee people a way to use higher than normal damage outputToB doesn't really have have higher damage output than other melee, except when limited to a standard action (and the latter lacks pounce). At later levels a warblade, for example, would probably deal more damage with a full attack than with a strike.

And a barbarian would deal more damage still.


the Warblade (d12 HD, full BAB, and heavy armor are all nice)Warblades aren't proficient with heavy armour, out of the box.