What Makes swordsages good?

[The Underlord]

Whenever someone wants to make a monk the answer is unarmed swordsage. Why are they good at being unarmed?

[mootoall]

Whenever someone wants to make a monk the answer is unarmed swordsage. Why are they good at being unarmed?

They have the same base unarmed damage, plus strikes/boosts. Basically, the same reason the Warblade is better than a fighter.

[Soranar]

They have an alternate class feature that gives them the same unarmed damage progression as a monk's but, unlike monks, their class features actually work well together.

[hamishspence]

I think it's more to do with - they get monk-ish powers, and with manuevers are more complex to play, as well as being more competitive.

[The Underlord]

where is alternate class feature listed?

[mootoall]

where is alternate class feature listed?

Same page as the Swordsage, I would imagine.

[Yorrin]

Soranar has the right of it. The unarmed ACF for swordsages gives Monk unarmed damage to them, and maneuvers are better than the class features a monk gets.

EDIT:

where is alternate class feature listed?

"Adaptations" on pg20

[hamishspence]

Mountain Hammer, for example, since it overcomes all damage reduction, outstrips Ki Strike by a long way.

[Kobold-Bard]

where is alternate class feature listed?

ToB p.20 - Trade Light armour proficiency for Monk's Unarmed Strike progression.

Beware the wrath of the RAW monster however, since by RAW Swordsages only get their Wisdom Mod as an AC bonus while wearing Light Armour, so Unarmed Swordsages lose it unless they pay a proficiency feat to get Light armour back.

[koscum]

ToB p.20 - Trade Light armour proficiency for Monk's Unarmed Strike progression.

Beware the wrath of the RAW monster however, since by RAW Swordsages only get their Wisdom Mod as an AC bonus while wearing Light Armour, so Unarmed Swordsages lose it unless they pay a proficiency feat to get Light armour back.

They also get 6x Int modifier skill points @ lvl1. :smallconfused:

[Talya]

ToB p.20 - Trade Light armour proficiency for Monk's Unarmed Strike progression.

Beware the wrath of the RAW monster however, since by RAW Swordsages only get their Wisdom Mod as an AC bonus while wearing Light Armour, so Unarmed Swordsages lose it unless they pay a proficiency feat to get Light armour back.

Non-proficiency doesn't keep you from wearing armor, it just gives you the armor check penalty of the armor as a penalty to a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter anyway since any half decent light armor has no armor check penalty.

[Dusk Eclipse]

ToB p.20 - Trade Light armour proficiency for Monk's Unarmed Strike progression.

Beware the wrath of the RAW monster however, since by RAW Swordsages only get their Wisdom Mod as an AC bonus while wearing Light Armour, so Unarmed Swordsages lose it unless they pay a proficiency feat to get Light armour back.

Or a dip into most classes (I like two levels into warblade for some Iron Heart Maneuvers) or just use a light armour without penalties (I think a mithril chain shirt covers this, add Dastana and Chahair ana for mora AC; but keep it mithral to avoid penalties):smallbiggrin:

[Kobold-Bard]

Non-proficiency doesn't keep you from wearing armor, it just gives you the armor check penalty of the armor as a penalty to a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter anyway since any half decent light armor has no armor check penalty.

It does include attack rolls which might suck, though you're right, the cheap stuff doesn't hurt as much as I thought.

[awa]

dasta and chariama don't need to be mitheral just master work.
a -0 penalty to attack wont mess you up to bad. for that same reason a mitheral buckler is good for a wizard

[Vortling]

It does include attack rolls which might suck, though you're right, the cheap stuff doesn't hurt as much as I thought.

Not just the cheap stuff. Masterwork Studded Leather armor (175 gp) and Mithral Chain shirt (1,100gp) also have no armor check penalty. Both easily affordable at low levels.

To answer the OP: Maneuvers and Stances. For more specific comparison let's look at flurry of blows. Flurry takes a full round attack meaning you can only move 5 feet if you want to flurry. Hardly useful for a class that's supposed to be a mobile attacker. Contrast with the Tiger Claw maneuvers that either let you make multiple attacks as a standard or swift action or grant you the ability to pounce at target. This holds true for all the rest of the maneuver disciplines as well. They do the job more sensibly than the monk's class features.

[Elric VIII]

Keep in mind, the Unarmed Swordsage is not an actual ACF, it is a sugested modification to the original Swordsage. The adaptations section is, by no means, a complete thought. It is not unreasonable to change the Swordsage AC bonus to exactly that of the Monk, since that is the apparent intent of the adaptation.




Or a dip into most classes (I like two levels into warblade for some Iron Heart Maneuvers) or just use a light armour without penalties (I think a mithril chain shirt covers this, add Dastana and Chahair ana for mora AC; but keep it mithral to avoid penalties):smallbiggrin:

Just wondering, what is the Chahair ana? I checked A&EG, but did not see it.

[Greenish]

Just wondering, what is the Chahair ana? I checked A&EG, but did not see it.Chahar-Aina is just some plating that goes over your mail/leather. It's from OA, and didn't make it to A&EG unlike Dastana.

[sonofzeal]

- Monk, as written, is nonfunctional (flurry of misses, can't flurry and move at the same time anyway, never gets suitable AC to front-line, and lacks effective alternatives)

- Swordsages, as written, are highly competent (maneuvers are good, chassis is good, other class features are good, easily the best light-infantry class in the game).

- Corrolary - it is very hard to make a competent Monk, but equally hard to make an incompetent Swordsage. On the other hand, it's also very hard to "break" Swordsage, there's very little in the way of abusive combos.

- The Unarmed Swordsage adaptation gets the best portions of being Monk, and doesn't much it cares about... and sad thing is, it's still a fair trade.

- Maneuvers are just plain fun, they give you variety and spice to melee combat beyond "I hit it again".

[Elric VIII]

Chahar-Aina is just some plating that goes over your mail/leather. It's from OA, and didn't make it to A&EG unlike Dastana.

That's pertty cool, modular armor. Can these bets be enhanced/enchanted in addition to your normal armor?

It seems like a good some special abilities for cheaper than piling it all on your base armor if that works.

[Greenish]

That's pertty cool, modular armor. Can these bets be enhanced/enchanted in addition to your normal armor?As far as I can see, yes. The basic AC bonus won't stack, but as you observed, special qualities should.

[FMArthur]

Really, ToB's best nail in the Monk coffin (extremely late nails that required gravedigging to hammer in) was not the Swordsage's unarmed adaptation, but came in the form of a feat called Superior Unarmed Strike, which lets you be a competent unarmed brawler with any class you want to.

It's hard to see why Monk was a class at all; its main features are about as good as basic armor and weapon proficiencies, and often worse. Every melee class should have had the option to be an unarmed specialist from the start. Fighters, Rogues, Rangers, Barbarians, Clerics and Druids could each have represented certain kinds of monks without WotC having to make a Monk class at all.

[tyckspoon]

As far as I can see, yes. The basic AC bonus won't stack, but as you observed, special qualities should.

Actually.. the AC bonus will stack. The Dastana (Chahar-Aina uses the same language) explicitly stacks with worn armor and shield, and enhancement bonuses become part of that armor bonus, so that stacks too. You can get +5 Chain Shirt, +5 Dastana, and +5 Chahar to have a +21 Armor bonus. In Light armor. With no ACP, assuming correct application of Mithral and/or Masterwork bonuses. Suck it, Full Plate. :smallamused: (Stupid things happen when you create things that directly violate basic stacking rules, which is probably why these particular things never found themselves ported to a 3.5 source.)

[Dusk Eclipse]

Actually.. the AC bonus will stack. The Dastana (Chahar-Aina uses the same language) explicitly stacks with worn armor and shield, and enhancement bonuses become part of that armor bonus, so that stacks too. You can get +5 Chain Shirt, +5 Dastana, and +5 Chahar to have a +21 Armor bonus. In Light armor. With no ACP, assuming correct application of Mithral and/or Masterwork bonuses. Suck it, Full Plate. :smallamused: (Stupid things happen when you create things that directly violate basic stacking rules, which is probably why these particular things never found themselves ported to a 3.5 source.)

The joys of the Grandfather clause:smallamused:

[Greenish]

Actually.. the AC bonus will stack. The Dastana (Chahar-Aina uses the same language) explicitly stacks with worn armor and shield, and enhancement bonuses become part of that armor bonus, so that stacks too.Hmm, I always imagined the enhancement bonuses were for the character, not for the armour, but I can see that interpretation too.

[tyckspoon]

Hmm, I always imagined the enhancement bonuses were for the character, not for the armour, but I can see that interpretation too.

It crops up from time to time in other topics, most frequently when people want to try and stack Bracers of Armor with Magic Vestments'd robes or similar. The core books/SRD rules require following a little bit of a logic chain, but the Rules Compendium is quite explicit about- it's under Armor Class, subheader Enhancement Bonuses, page 15 if you happen to have a copy around.

[Greenish]

It crops up from time to time in other topics, most frequently when people want to try and stack Bracers of Armor with Magic Vestments'd robes or similar. The core books/SRD rules require following a little bit of a logic chain, but the Rules Compendium is quite explicit about- it's under Armor Class, subheader Enhancement Bonuses, page 15 if you happen to have a copy around.Well, that's explicit enough. They stack, my bad.