Warblade homebrew nerfs

[Moginheden]

When I recently introduced my warblade character to a campaign the entire rest of the group said "holy #@%@ that's overpowered, why would anyone ever make a fighter or barbarian or even a rogue instead of warblade?" or words along those lines. I convinced them that rogue still has a place in the party, but was a bit stumped on the fighter and barbarian when the warblade gets d12 hit dice, full BaB and the equivalent of spellcasting with his maneuvers. Plus int to a ton of different things.

I've heard some DMs don't allow Tome of Battle because it's too powerful.

Are there and standard/common nerfs to the warblade class we can apply to get the rest of my group ok with the class?


If there aren't any common adjustments to the ToB classes what I'm wondering about is giving the warblade d8 hit dice only simple weapons and light armor proficiency, (no shields, medium armor or martial weapons), then granting all martial weapon proficiencies with all weapons associated with any disciplines the warblade has at least one known maneuver in.

[dragonsamurai77]

The Warblade is indeed much better than other melee classes. This, however, is a very good thing. It is hard for many groups to understand, but casters are dozens of times better than the Fighter, Monk, etc. Tome of Battle is one of the greatest 3.5 books ever published, because it allows martial characters to be able to function somewhat with properly played casters. Note the somewhat, however. Despite the major gains from ToB, martial characters still lack the world-bending and -destroying power of casters.

[Arundel]

If anyone in your party can cast a spell, you are still less powerful. If you give us the party composition we can give you better examples.

[Tvtyrant]

Also note that at lower levels and lower optimization levels ToB does over power other players, due to being functional right out of the box. In a group where the casters don't appear to be far ahead of the melee ToB might be too much, as the group is likely playing towards 5th tier. Casters are easier to mess up then ToB is, with lots of useless abilities and no back ups like d12 HD.

If I was going to "nerf" the Warblade I would make the recovery mechanic take 1 minute, so the Warblade is less able to deal its best moves all the time. And lower the HD to d10 to placate the Barbarian.

[huttj509]

When I recently introduced my warblade character to a campaign the entire rest of the group said "holy #@%@ that's overpowered, why would anyone ever make a fighter or barbarian or even a rogue instead of warblade?" or words along those lines. I convinced them that rogue still has a place in the party, but was a bit stumped on the fighter and barbarian when the warblade gets d12 hit dice, full BaB and the equivalent of spellcasting with his maneuvers. Plus int to a ton of different things.

I've heard some DMs don't allow Tome of Battle because it's too powerful.

Are there and standard/common nerfs to the warblade class we can apply to get the rest of my group ok with the class?


If there aren't any common adjustments to the ToB classes what I'm wondering about is giving the warblade d8 hit dice only simple weapons and light armor proficiency, (no shields, medium armor or martial weapons), then granting all martial weapon proficiencies with all weapons associated with any disciplines the warblade has at least one known maneuver in.

Barb and fighter do still have their place for specific builds. Fully tricked out a "one trick pony" build can generally do more with their one trick, but warblade has much needed versatility.

Part of the problem with core martial types is, well, at base they're...um...not so hot. Yes, if you know what you're doing you can make them the king of ubercharging smack-hurler, but it takes a lot of careful building.

Basically, on a scale from 1-10 in terms of power/flexibility, fighters might range from, say, 2-7, while warblades are 4-6, straight out of the box they overshadow the underpowered fighter builds, which is kinda the point, cause those are, well, underpowered.

If your party tends to have sword and board fighters, healing clerics, and non-metamagic blaster wizards, then I'd say nerf/ban ToB. Not because it's overpowered, but because the floor power level is higher than where your group generally plays (might sound like the same thing....it's not). Given the versatility of maneuvers, it'd be really hard to just tag a couple nerfs and have it fit in fine if that's the normal group mindset.

[Icestorm245]

Warblades are very good, and while one is in the party, a fighter or barbarian really has no place. Also, warblades also are limited to certain schools without the option of generalization, so you can only get certain maneuvers/stances. I don't think any nerfing is required, except maybe lowering the hit dice to d10 - he shouldn't outshine the fighter in health, and definately not equal a barbarian's. The barbarian has a d12 because he's always recklessly attacking without concern for being hit. A fighter has a d10, along with ranger (3.0) and paladin because those classes (in a pure classical sense, mind you) tend to have more ways of avoiding attacks entirely. Since the warblade is also the type of class to avoid damage more than take it, it should have d10. But I digress. Warblade, along with every other class, can be challenged with the proper tools for the job. It is just as likely to fall to a dragon as a fighter or barbarian is.

[Moginheden]

well my main concern is I agree with them for low level campaigns. Wizards are quadratic. Fighters are linear.

Bellow level 8 or so, (exact level is up for debate) the ToB classes are just overpowered period. Once you get to the point that casters start to shine you do need ToB to keep up, but the changes I mentioned shouldn't be a problem in that department as they would already have any weapons they want by picking a maneuver from it's discipline and the smaller hit dice don't hurt the casts much anyway.

As for group makeup we have:
-2 rogues
-dragon shaman
-ranger (who took the alternate class feature to give up spellcasting)
-swashbuckler
-monk/drunken master
-a multiclass monstrosity that is taking even levels of all of the other player characters classes, (and is working out surprisingly well.)

[Wings of Peace]

I'd play a Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian over a Warblade if forced to choose between the two personally. The Warblade is just stronger out of the box but the Barb can get similar mileage with a bit of work. Fighter is the fighter, he'll need to optimize but probably won't equal the Barb or the Warblade without multi-classing.

[Moginheden]

I should probably also mention this warblade is replacing my old fighter.

[Seerow]

As for group makeup we have:
-2 rogues
-dragon shaman
-ranger (who took the alternate class feature to give up spellcasting)
-swashbuckler
-monk/drunken master
-a multiclass monstrosity that is taking even levels of all of the other player characters classes, (and is working out surprisingly well.)

Your group is pretty low op, that's why the warblade seems so out of place. Not a single caster in the whole group, the strongest class there is rogue. Given that comp, some nerfs to Warblade may be warranted, or convincing the player to change to something more in line with the rest of the group.


It is however important to remember if someone wants to play just about any class with access to 9th level spells, they are that much stronger than everyone else in the group, including the Warblade.

[Partysan]

Warblades got the d12 hit die because they are a frontliner without heavy armor proficiency. But yes, in general they will be more useful than a barbarian or fighter, as long as those aren't tweaked out.
A charging barbarian with Shock Trooper, a Dungeoncrashing fighter or a Chain Tripper fighter will be doing a lot more damage or having superior battlefield control than a normal Warblade. But many groups don't play even near that level.

Unfortunately there isn't much you can do to nerf a Warblade without pretty much destroying it.

[Tyndmyr]

When I recently introduced my warblade character to a campaign the entire rest of the group said "holy #@%@ that's overpowered, why would anyone ever make a fighter or barbarian or even a rogue instead of warblade?" or words along those lines. I convinced them that rogue still has a place in the party, but was a bit stumped on the fighter and barbarian when the warblade gets d12 hit dice, full BaB and the equivalent of spellcasting with his maneuvers. Plus int to a ton of different things.

Well, feats are occasionally valuable. The two level fighter dip remains common. So does the barbarian dip(often lion totem) for rage/pounce.

Fighter is useful up to 6 with Dungeoncrasher, and let's be honest...there never was a reason to go to Fighter 20 anyhow. You ended up either multiclassing, or taking prestige classes, or you had made some kind of error.


I've heard some DMs don't allow Tome of Battle because it's too powerful.

It has more power than the standard beatstick classes. This is because the standard beatstick classes lack power dramatically as compared to magical classes.

In my experience, the DMs that dislike ToB are either very unused to any sort of optimization, or dislike the flavor, or are unfamiliar with 3.5.


Are there and standard/common nerfs to the warblade class we can apply to get the rest of my group ok with the class?

I'm a bit uncertain. Personally, I quite like them as they are, and don't often see requests for them to be nerfed. I suppose you could offer to drop it to a D10 hit die, and perhaps slow initiator progression a bit.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Bellow level 8 or so,

You mean level 6. There's a reason it's E6 and not E8. At 6th level, sorcerers can fly. Plus, the casters are still relevant in a game with ToB at the low levels, as their job is battlefield control (entangle, grease)/buffing (enlarge person, bull's strength, blur)/debuffing (ray of enfeeblement) and maybe a touch of blasting (magic missile, scorching ray).

[Alabenson]

well my main concern is I agree with them for low level campaigns. Wizards are quadratic. Fighters are linear.

Bellow level 8 or so, (exact level is up for debate) the ToB classes are just overpowered period. Once you get to the point that casters start to shine you do need ToB to keep up, but the changes I mentioned shouldn't be a problem in that department as they would already have any weapons they want by picking a maneuver from it's discipline and the smaller hit dice don't hurt the casts much anyway.

As for group makeup we have:
-2 rogues
-dragon shaman
-ranger (who took the alternate class feature to give up spellcasting)
-swashbuckler
-monk/drunken master
-a multiclass monstrosity that is taking even levels of all of the other player characters classes, (and is working out surprisingly well.)

As has been mentioned earlier, given your group's makeup, a warblade is somewhat overpowered, given that it's an easily-played Tier 3, while the rest of the group seems to be in the mid-Tier 4 to low Tier 5 range. Furthermore, and a bigger concern, is the fact that the warblade occupies the same niche as several of the other players, and would easily outshine them.
What you may want to consider is, instead of a warblade, play a support-focused caster. You'd be filling a void in the group's makeup, meaning that you're not stepping on anyone's toes, and if you focus on support as opposed to playing god, you can contribute significantly without makeing the other players feel useless.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

The passive aggressive strategy is to drop warblade and play a druid. You want to talk about OP at low levels? How about two fleshrakers pouncing, tripping, pinning, raking, and poisoning everything in sight? How about spamming Summon Monster III to get 1d4+1 greenbound wolves to spam Wall of Thorns and Entangle while tanking damage like no one's business?

And it works in core, too. Just less ridiculous. On second thought, there's a reason why it's passive aggressive. Just show them a druid build without actually playing it.

[Tvtyrant]

Or don't, and allow them to play at the optimization level they are happy with. ToB fixes balance issues that arise from optimization, and if those issues are not extant then ToB is unneeded.

Now wanting to for its own sake as the OP wants is a different story; in that case you could knock down the HD and recovery, or simply play a Swordsage since it plays less like a melee character and more like a caster. This removes some of the "stepping on toes" sensation.

[Partysan]

You could also let the two rogues, the swashbuckler and the monk play/multiclass into swordsage/warblade. Warblade for the swashbuckler, swordsage for anyone else.

[Moginheden]

Now wanting to for its own sake as the OP wants is a different story; in that case you could knock down the HD and recovery, or simply play a Swordsage since it plays less like a melee character and more like a caster. This removes some of the "stepping on toes" sensation.

This is more what I was looking for. I'm not trying to upset the optimization level of the group, I just liked the flavor and style of the warblade and I'm trying to figure out how to make it fit the same tier as the rest of the group.

[Talbot]

Don't nerf the class. Just focus on counters and boosts, and play a tank. Let everybody else worry about damage output (maybe take one or two strikes to use on special occasions). Alternatively, if the Fighter isn't doing it, focus on lockdown stuff, status effects, etc. That way you fill an important role without ruining anybody's fun, and if they start to optimize/die & reroll, you can easily switch gears and become an offensive monster in the space of two or three levels, if you want to. Such is the beauty of Warblade.

Pretty much everybody else in the party (sans Dragon Shaman) is apparently going for damage (I assume), so do something else. They'll love you for White Raven stuff, particularly.

[erikun]

Bellow level 8 or so, (exact level is up for debate) the ToB classes are just overpowered period.
Not so much that they are overpowered, as that they have a higher low point than fighters, rangers, or rogues. I am fairly sure that I could create a rogue at those levels comparable to your warblade, and quite certain that a barbarian/fighter would be as well, but that is because I know the best options to make them comparable.

Anyways, back so your question: Why not a Crusader? Your party seems to lack some healing elements, so a heavy-armor tank that can heal others and swings around a mace would likely be accepted. The Devoted Spirit maneuvers can heal while you attack, and it's probably a better option than the Cleric.

If you are looking at downpowering the classes (perhaps good in your case), look first at removing their extra abilities. Something like the Crusader's counterstrike and the Warblade's intelligence bonuses become very impressive compared to what the Fighter and Rogue get at that point.

[Elric VIII]

Anyways, back so your question: Why not a Crusader? Your party seems to lack some healing elements, so a heavy-armor tank that can heal others and swings around a mace would likely be accepted. The Devoted Spirit maneuvers can heal while you attack, and it's probably a better option than the Cleric.

Taking this a step further, maybe you could power down a bit by making a Bardblade that splits Bard and Warblade levels equally, rather than Bard 4/Warblade 16.

This will slow down your maneuver progression a bit, limiting your power. It would also provide you with party-buffing options (Inspire Courage, Haste, etc) and even healing, which you seem to be lacking.

This may be completely off your character concept, however.

[Leon]

Fighter is useful up to 6 with Dungeoncrasher, and let's be honest...there never was a reason to go to Fighter 20 anyhow. You ended up either multiclassing, or taking prestige classes, or you had made some kind of error.


Pending your point of view - Its a rather narrow one that sees a class only as a few levels. Pure Fighter is a good solid class from go to woe, customizable to suit what you want out of it and with a group that works together a force to be reckoned with.

If you want something fancy then a ToB class maybe what you need but for many a Fighter does what they want very well.

[Lord_Gareth]

If you want something fancy then a ToB class maybe what you need but for many a Fighter does what they want very well.

And what, praytell, is it that they want? Because, seriously, there's only two things a fighter does well, and one of them (archery) is done far, far better through PrCing or playing a cleric or ranger. I'll give you a hint on the other one: it's charging. Fighters are good for damage you need scientific notation to express. For literally anything else, call an Initiator.

[Roc Ness]

To answer the question of nerfs:

Given the current party, start by trying to lower the HD to D10, reducing BAB to +15, dropping bonus feats and "effective fighter level for Weapon Specialisation".

If the party is still complaining, you could try and restrict yourself to a only one or two martial disciplines, preferrably of the supporting type so that you can contribute positively to everybody else's performance (and thus give them less to worry about). Among the Warblade disciplines, this would probably only allow White Raven, but since this is a "homebrew" nerf, you could probably negotiate to gain access to Devoted Spirit or Setting Sun maneuvers in lieu of the standard, more outright damaging (and overpowered looking) Warblade disciplines. :smallsmile:

[Talbot]

I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but seriously; there's no need to nerf it. Play it as a defender; use stances for battlefield control, boosts to move around, and White Raven to make your buddies awesome. Unless you're dead-set on being a damage dealer (which seems silly given the rest of your party), reinventing yourself as the canny toughguy who can take abuse, slow enemies down, and inspire his allies is probably going to the way to go, and likely a lot more fun than just rolling big piles of D6s anyways.

Focus on White Raven. Pick up mobility stuff from Tiger Claw, if you want, and the save boosters from Diamond Mind, with defensive goodies like IHS and IHE from Iron Heart. That should eat up most of your maneuvers, and use whatever's left for a strike or two "just in case". As long as you're the damage sponge/implacable man/support guy, and not the "I do all that and also I outdamage you" guy, the rest of the party will be glad, not discouraged, that you're playing Warblade.

Obviously you CAN nerf it, but there's really no need for it and you'll probably have more fun if you don't. This is doubly true for the rest of your party, who only benefit from having somebody else drawing enemy attention and handing out free attacks, bonuses, and intiative bumps all day.

[Fouredged Sword]

I second a bardblade of some kind focusing on white raven. Maybe a two level dip into marshal for some cool auras to stack with the dragon shaman's auras.

Take healing hymn and lots of level one memento morries for good healing ability from low level spell slots. Max ranks in preform

[Cespenar]

The White Raven suggestions are easily the best ones in the thread.

See, if you deal, let's throw out a number out there, 200 damage to the big bad guy via some metamagic'd orb or some leaping pouncing charge and drop him right away, people won't get to play their parts, would be unhappy, and eventually will call you overpowered/broken/etc.

But if you'd instead buff/boost the party enough that they as a result could deal 200 damage more than they would originally deal, people would be able to contribute, be pretty happy because of their especially effective attacks, and could even congratulate you on your supportive role.

[BlueInc]

For the most part, I see the Warblade/Fighter relationship as the Fighter/Warrior relationship; they're similar, but one is obviously stronger.

As for "nerfing" yourself, don't. I know I'm repeating what other have said, but make your character a team player (tank, battlefield control) and everyone will have fun. If you're still worried, play a Crusader - they're arguably better tanks.

It's the same problem people run into with Tier 1 classes like Wizards:

1. If the Wizard of the party is taking obscene metamagic stacking, no save, no SR, save-or-suck spells and destroying everything and everyone in his path, and their friends are playing a Fighter, a Rogue, a healbot Cleric and a Monk, there's gonna be problems.

2. If the Wizard of the party is buffing, crowd-controlling, summoning creatures to help the Rogue flank, and generally being a helpful guy, everything will be fine.

[HunterOfJello]

Basic Counterarguments for you to use:

1. Warblades are obviously superior to Fighters and leave the Fighter class as a primarily dipping class. However, the Fighter class was not properly developed in the first place and is invalid to use as a comparison to any other class in the game. A class that has absolutely no unique class features whatsoever is not appropriate to compare to other classes. Ask the person to choose any other Full BAB class in the game to compare the Warblade to and they'll find that the other class was either flawed as a class in the first place (Soulborn, Samurai, etc.) or still has features that can be optimized to be on a comparable power level as the Warblade.

2. Barbarians are not useless compared to Warblades when they are properly optimized. Warblades are obviously great when they're just taken out of the box, but Barbarians have huge potential when they take the right alternate class features, feats, and prestige classes. The pure melee damage output that barbarians are capable of is completely superior to that of a Warblade. Barbarians also have the advantage of beings able to multiclass extremely well with a dip into Warblade to gain a stance and some maneuvers.

3. Warblades are also often compared to Rangers because they're both full bab classes that have the potential to dual wield and do damage using strength instead of precision damage (sneak attack, skirmish, etc.). Rangers still have the potential to go into powerful prestige classes however and they can be Wildshape Rangers who have tons of options and powerful abilities available to them with prestige classes like the Master of Many Forms.


While ToB classes can often look surprisingly powerful at low levels, by the time everyone gets to level 4-6, the difference isn't anywhere near as noticeable. The same is true for many other classes from splatbooks like a Totemist 2 who can run around making 4+ attacks per turn while all the other level 2 characters are making only 1. (A totemist can also be optimized so that they have 7 or more natural attacks by level 2.)

~

If the group has such a huge issue with the Warblade's power level at level 1, then I would suggest you ask the DM to change it to a pseudo-prestige class that can only be entered after BAB +4 or something along those lines. You can take a few levels in other classes and then jump into the Warblade class. You'll lose out a little bit, but still not lose much because of how the Initiator level mechanic works.

I don't think it's a great idea to do that, but it might help the others get used to the ToB class and allow them to understand it better. Don't let them offer suggestions to change it though. If someone wants to nerf the warblade class, then they obviously don't understand it, and if they don't understand it, then they shouldn't be offering opinions about it.

[BlueInc]

If the group has such a huge issue with the Warblade's power level at level 1, then I would suggest you ask the DM to change it to a pseudo-prestige class that can only be entered after BAB +4 or something along those lines. You can take a few levels in other classes and then jump into the Warblade class. You'll lose out a little bit, but still not lose much because of how the Initiator level mechanic works.

Actually, yeah, taking 2 (maybe 4) levels of Fighter and then going into Warblade should solve most of your group's worries.

[Leon]

And what, praytell, is it that they want? Because, seriously, there's only two things a fighter does well, and one of them (archery) is done far, far better through PrCing or playing a cleric or ranger. I'll give you a hint on the other one: it's charging. Fighters are good for damage you need scientific notation to express. For literally anything else, call an Initiator.

What they want is what they want regardless of its what you agree on or not - the fact remains that its a fine class for many.
Many i dare say don't give a brass razoo about the finer points of optimization or tier lists, the small slice of the RPG comunity that we see on here is but just that a small slice of it (abit loud in its opinions)

[Iferus]

Use White raven, and share the glory. Even Douse the Flames will be useful to aid those rogues.

[HappyBlanket]

What they want is what they want regardless of its what you agree on or not - the fact remains that its a fine class for many.
Many i dare say don't give a brass razoo about the finer points of optimization or tier lists, the small slice of the RPG comunity that we see on here is but just that a small slice of it (abit loud in its opinions)

I'd argue that it's a fine class for chargers and archers, not for many. But that was covered and subsequently disregarded. And even those (and certainly other variations of the Fighter) require some effort on the DM's part just to make it useful in combat. Never mind outside combat.

As for the Fighter's merit in customization: you'd actually have more options to choose from if you permitted yourself to multiclass instead of taking Fighter 3. The relevant Warblade has more customization in it's chosen Maneuvers alone.

Getting back to the discussion: Since the classes of your group aren't on par with the Warblade (I recall you had a Dragon Shaman, a Scout, a Ranger without spell casting, etc), I do think a nerf is in order if you enjoy the Warblade's system. That being the case, lowering it's HP, requiring a longer time to regain Maneuvers, or even just picking subpar Maneuvers will do fine.

And again, nearly every class in the game is overpowered when you compare it to the Fighter.

[Midnight_v]

Don't nerf the class. Just focus on counters and boosts, and play a tank. Let everybody else worry about damage output (maybe take one or two strikes to use on special occasions). Alternatively, if the Fighter isn't doing it, focus on lockdown stuff, status effects, etc. That way you fill an important role without ruining anybody's fun, and if they start to optimize/die & reroll, you can easily switch gears and become an offensive monster in the space of two or three levels, if you want to. Such is the beauty of Warblade.

Pretty much everybody else in the party (sans Dragon Shaman) is apparently going for damage (I assume), so do something else. They'll love you for White Raven stuff, particularly.

I just wanted to give you a plus 1. It gets pretty stomach turning when I see threads like this, not because of the people involved, but cause I know its a snap judgement based on a lack of intel most of the time, and its common.
Wizards are God, and the whole "At low levels they suck, but get infinite power later" is ... well a myth.

So if you really want to nerf them. Give them only 1 strike per recharge, and the rest have to be boosts and counters.

Though it be far better, to do what the quoted poster says.
Also... exactly who "IN THE PARTY" is this warblade stepping on?

[Greyfeld]

What they want is what they want regardless of its what you agree on or not - the fact remains that its a fine class for many.
Many i dare say don't give a brass razoo about the finer points of optimization or tier lists, the small slice of the RPG comunity that we see on here is but just that a small slice of it (abit loud in its opinions)

Whether or not the Fighter is a "fine class for many" is irrelevant to the discussion. The fact is, it's a Tier 5 class, and only really has any time in the spotlight when properly optimized (which, in fact, involves taking very few levels in Fighter), and playing in a Tier 4-6 campaign.

Whether or not a person enjoys their character is completely subjective, and has no baring on a class' tier ranking. However, power and utility are NOT subjective, and it is a proven FACT that the Fighter class is woefully lacking in both in any game that includes a full progression spellcaster (which is most of them, I would wager).

[Seerow]

Whether or not the Fighter is a "fine class for many" is irrelevant to the discussion. The fact is, it's a Tier 5 class, and only really has any time in the spotlight when properly optimized (which, in fact, involves taking very few levels in Fighter), and playing in a Tier 4-6 campaign.

Whether or not a person enjoys their character is completely subjective, and has no baring on a class' tier ranking. However, power and utility are NOT subjective, and it is a proven FACT that the Fighter class is woefully lacking in both in any game that includes a full progression spellcaster (which is most of them, I would wager).

The game in question lacks a full progression spellcaster, and even partial progression spellcaster.


Just sayin'

[HappyBlanket]

The game in question lacks a full progression spellcaster, and even partial progression spellcaster.


Just sayin'
That particular line of quotes originates from the statement saying that the Fighter is a solid class, and is in response to that statement. The OP's game has nothing to do with it (though you are correct in asserting that the party members aren't terribly more valuable than a full Fighter).

[Knaight]

You mean level 6. There's a reason it's E6 and not E8. At 6th level, sorcerers can fly. Plus, the casters are still relevant in a game with ToB at the low levels, as their job is battlefield control (entangle, grease)/buffing (enlarge person, bull's strength, blur)/debuffing (ray of enfeeblement) and maybe a touch of blasting (magic missile, scorching ray).
Plus, the points where ToB is at the weakest relative to non ToB melee are levels 6, 11, and 16. Basically, every time the full attack gets ramped up a bit.

[Optimator]

Plus, the points where ToB is at the weakest relative to non ToB melee are levels 6, 11, and 16. Basically, every time the full attack gets ramped up a bit.

It's at its strongest at level 5, I'd wager. 3rd level maneuvers and no iteratives.


What they want is what they want regardless of its what you agree on or not - the fact remains that its a fine class for many.
Many i dare say don't give a brass razoo about the finer points of optimization or tier lists, the small slice of the RPG comunity that we see on here is but just that a small slice of it (abit loud in its opinions)

Many (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word), you say? Would you say, *gestures outward* ten million? :smallwink:

[Anarchy_Kanya]

@ OP
You want a good Warblade nerf? Play a Fighter. Done.

[Leon]

Many (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word), you say? Would you say, *gestures outward* ten million? :smallwink:


The loud majority on a forums are not the choice that the overall player base would necessary use. What you like to think is standard is not a absolute - its just annoying that its the prevailing attitude on a otherwise nice forums.

[Lord_Gareth]

The loud majority on a forums are not the choice that the overall player base would necessary use. What you like to think is standard is not a absolute - its just annoying that its the prevailing attitude on a otherwise nice forums.

"Passes at a table" and "Acceptable class" are not the same thing. Fighter is objectively terrible. This is not a debatable fact. Some groups, however, are either married to genre convention or genuinely fail to understand intelligent application of monster/NPC capabilities, thus making Fighters more viable at those tables. Clearly this is not one of those tables, so recommending that he play a fighter is unhelpful, especially when the OP says he'd prefer to be a warblade.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Fighter... with Martial Study/Stance then?

[Lord_Gareth]

Fighter... with Martial Study/Stance then?

So if you do it at first level you've blown four feats...to be a first level Warblade with no feats. Take the feats later and you run into problems meeting maneuver prerequisites, not to mention whatever carefully selected build you're specializing in. Even if we're not optimizing, making your Fighter do something can take awhile - look at the number of feats needed to use a shield effectively, or TWF, or even charge for massive damage! These feats are often needed just to make the concept hit the table, let alone make it effective.

And if your group is just attached to genre conventions, rather than simply being uninformed about how the game's abilities actually work, even low-op you'll run into problems fighting classical enemies like dragons, fiends or even dire animals!

Or...you can play a Warblade.

This is why Fighter is not an "acceptable" class. It's just the one some tables get stuck with because they either don't understand the actual balance of the game they're playing or, for some reason, they're married to the published fluff of Tome of Battle and won't deviate from it. It doesn't work for 'many'. It works for no one. The fact that 'many' choose to use it anyway only indicates the general lack of system education on the part of the majority.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Well, the problem is that OPs group thinks that Warblade is overpowered. IMO the easiest thing to do in this situation is to play a Fighter. With Martial Study and Stance he will be just like a Warblade, but not that overpowered.

[Greenish]

So if you do it at first level you've blown four feats...You can't take Martial Study at first level as a fighter, since your IL will be 0.5 (rounded down as usual), and first level maneuvers require IL ≥ 1.

[Elric VIII]

You can't take Martial Study at first level as a fighter, since your IL will be 0.5 (rounded down as usual), and first level maneuvers require IL ≥ 1.

Is there no minimum IL clause somewhere?

[Greenish]

Is there no minimum IL clause somewhere?If there is, I've never come across it, but feel free to dig one up.

[Edit]: You're not the first one to speculate it's existence, but no one has yet to come up with an actual citation. I don't know why people assume there is one.

[Elric VIII]

If there is, I've never come across it, but feel free to dig one up.

[Edit]: You're not the first one to speculate it's existence, but no one has yet to come up with an actual citation. I don't know why people assume there is one.

Well, I can't seem to find one either. However, this is because it does not mention a minimum or rounding down. Now, I know there is a precedent for rounding down (although I am unsure if it is explicitly stated), but there also seems to be a precedent for having a minimum of 1, in most abilities I can recall.

I'm not sure if there is any merit to that.

Also, I think the assumption of a minimum is specifically for cases like this, in which someone might want to make a Fighter or other core melee class with a bit of ToB ability. I honestly though that when I read the passage since it mentions that people with other martial training can learn advanced techniques.

[Coidzor]

As for group makeup we have:
-2 rogues
-dragon shaman
-ranger (who took the alternate class feature to give up spellcasting)
-swashbuckler
-monk/drunken master
-a multiclass monstrosity that is taking even levels of all of the other player characters classes, (and is working out surprisingly well.)

So you've got overspecialization duo, weak class, a decent class that decided to nerf himself to high heaven, a mediocre class, a poor class going into a worse PrC for that class, and someone who is playing a joke character and still managing to outpace the rest of the group.

Actually, let me restate that last one. You've got a player. Who is intentionally making a joke character. And is competing on the same level as the rest of this party or possibly exceeding them, depending upon how one reads your parenthetical statement.

Sir, methinks we've discovered the heart of the issue.

[MammonAzrael]

So you've got overspecialization duo, weak class, a decent class that decided to nerf himself to high heaven, a mediocre class, a poor class going into a worse PrC for that class, and someone who is playing a joke character and still managing to outpace the rest of the group.

Sir, methinks we've discovered the heart of the issue.

This sums up my thoughts on the thread rather well. All ToB classes are good out of the box, with no effort. Stick them in a low level game, with a bunch of classes that require some work and knowledge to make shine, and you're going to blow them away.

If you're happy with your group and where you all are playing at, optimization-wise, then I think the suggestion of just playing a fighter that spends his feats on Martial Study/Stance is a good choice. Personally I'd rather bring everyone else up, help them learn how to optimize, but that is a personal opinion.

[Coidzor]

In that vein, there are some resources that can help broaden things up a bit, even if it's just for the future.

A few things (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871666/The_3.5_Rogue_Handbook) to direct your rogueish friends towards. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8711233) And by a few things I mean two different handbook attempts. And something about sneak attacking spellcasters (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1240.0) just cause.

Something for your Ranger friend, the Horizon Tripper build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80415) that he may be able to get going or retrain into, since he's given up the spells anyway. Or this handbook on rangers (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=4621.20) in general.

There's also some information about Swift-huntery (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=103.0) goodness too.

Wild cohort (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a) for him and anyone else who wants a decent animal friend. Bonus points if natural bond is allowed to work for getting a more advanced one more quickly. And some thoughts on the interactions with such a wild cohort and the usage of the handle animal skill in general (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10396.0) which can be fairly nifty, to say the least of guys like Bubs (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7097263&postcount=38).

The Suel Arcanamach PrC (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19870638/The_Suel_Arcanamach_Handbook)can be of interest for the swashbuckler (and further reading on that here) (http://coboard.wikia.com/wiki/Swashbuckler)(and maybe rogue too for the suel arcanamach, though dipping into a full caster & prcing into a trickster caster PrC may be of more interest for both)

A little bit of a nudge of comparison of relative buffage (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=9830.0)(if that's what he's going for as it presumably is) for the Dragon Shaman (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19865414/The_Dragon_Shaman_Handbook) and further information on the class itself. And what could be viewed as its successor class, the Dragonfire Adept. (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19870954/The_New_Dragonfire_Adept_Handbook!)

Something that can add some fun for all of them to get in on the ToB action (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871270/Tome_of_Battle_for_Dummies), as ToB is rather multiclass friendly, actually. Then again, it's amazing what a level of cleric can do (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2773.0) to further a character concept. edit: Also, Magic of Incarnum (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=551.0)can be nifty, though it also can be a bit tricky.

Some general food for thought in regards to ACFs. (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872054/Alternative_Class_Features_III?pg=1)

[Darrin]

If there is, I've never come across it, but feel free to dig one up.


This errata project (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11890.msg405383#msg405383) has added a "minimum initiator level of 1st" to page 39.

[Dralnu]

Lower the hit dice to d10, nerf their recovery method to a full-round action like a swordsage. If you're really earnest about bringing it down to fighter/barbarian level, take out all the class abilities that aren't maneuvers / stances. You're still better than fighters and barbarians, but the gap closes.

[Elric VIII]

To the OP, I assume that since you haven't answered for a while you have come to a solution.

I was just curious as to what you went with?