ToB PRCs: what you gain at each level.

[only1doug]

Continuing from another thread to avoid de-railing that one:



I disagree with the interpretation of being able to take the same maneuver multiple times in different initiating classes but that's a simple binary choice so there's no point discussing it.

I also disagree that you can split the PRC maneuvers known and readied (only important for Mo9 levels) between your initiating classes, imo at any given level all martial class related abilities should be applied to the same base initiating class. This significantly impacts idiot crusader builds with Mo9 levels.


Tome of Battle is admittedly ambiguous on this point.


It is not ambiguous on this point, however. It explicitly states (Ch. 5, Prestige Classes, Advancing Martial Progression, Martial Adepts, Recovery Method, pg. 96) that "If you have levels in more than one martial adept class, you choose which recovery method you will use based on which adept class the new maneuver you are learning applies to." Clearly, this is a choice made on a per-maneuver basis, since the choice is made when you are learning a maneuver and is made again each time you learn a new one.


Same page, immediately above the part you quoted, in the section that actually deals with learning new maneuvers
Maneuvers known: when you gain additional maneuvers known these simply add to the maneuvers known of one martial adept standard class that you already possess.

So i certainly argue with your point that this "clearly is a manuever by manuever basis" as you are quoting from the wrong section for learning new manuevers. The section i have quoted reads to me that all maneuvers learned in a single level have to be applied to the same base class.
This doesn't cover the question of whether manuevers learned and manuevers prepared have to be from the same class.


Even if you can't separate the maneuvers learned in a single level, it still doesn't hurt my build. It makes things mildly less convenient, but isn't a problem. As long as you can separate maneuvers readied and maneuvers known and which class they apply to respectively. I think you can based on the text above the text you mentioned:

"If you have levels in two or more martial adept standard classes (for example, you are a multiclass swordsage/warblade), you must decide to which of your existing martial adept classes the new maneuvers known or maneuvers readied apply."

If you could only pick one class for known and readied, shouldn't it read "maneuvers known and maneuvers readied apply"?

Also, under the subheading Maneuvers Readied it indicates that you assign them to a martial progression, but it doesn't tie back to Maneuvers Known.

I can certainly see your argument for maneuvers known gained at any level only applying to one class, but I think you can separate the maneuvers known you gain and the maneuvers readied you gain.


That line is ambiguous. The later line removes that ambiguity. I maintain that you are flat-out, objectively wrong. There is no basis for your interpretation. You cannot take one ambiguous line that could go your way or my way, and then ignore another line that can only go my way, and pretend your way is equally valid. It is not. The preponderance of information is very much in my favor.


This question is open, certainly. The fact that you have to choose which recovery method applies to a maneuver when you learn it implies that you have to ready maneuvers from the class that learned it.


Unless you're arguing that you can choose to learn a maneuver "as a Swordsage maneuver" but then use the Crusader recovery method. Which is kind of an interesting idea, but I really doubt that's the correct interpretation.


You know what, I disagree with you totally but there is no point in discussing it as it is just sidetracks to this thread and you are just as Prejudiced to your view as I am to mine. Lets agree to disagree and drop the subject.


OK, explain to me how you can, based on one ambiguous line, ignore another completely unambiguous line. What is your logic whereby that becomes a valid conclusion?

I disagree with your interpretation as to ambigity of the first line. If you were to interpret the line in the same way that I do then the second line is supporting it.


Maneuvers known: when you gain additional maneuvers known these simply add to the maneuvers known of one martial adept standard class that you already possess.


What is ambiguous? at L1 of Mo9 you gain 2 manuevers, you apply these manuevers to one of your martial adapt standard classes.

[Talionis]

"If you have levels in two or more martial adept standard classes (for example, you are a multiclass swordsage/warblade), you must decide to which of your existing martial adept classes the new maneuvers known or maneuvers readied apply."

I think everyone will admit that much of the Tome of Battle is poorly written. By the time it was written they never got to do much if any errata. (I only know of one instance of errata and it was not very comprehensive). So they definitely could've been more clear.

I always applied each new maneuver individually to the different recovery mechanics at the player's discretion. I don't have a problem with using the Crusader recovery mechanic to recover a Shadow Hand maneuver.

What I think is misapplied is the logic loops that allow Crusaders to ready all their maneuvers at once and keep them all readied at all times. I don't have my book in front of me, but there is a part that talks about what happens when maneuvers are added to the Crusader and they seem to give you extra maneuvers that will eventually be readied so that you will always have some unreadied maneuvers to recover, at the very least at the beginning of a fight.

I won't say that the rules don't contradict themselves more than a little where the recovery mechanics are concerned and Crusader may RAW have this problem. But I think RAI, most GM's will make the Crusader add a Manuever readied and a maneuver available so that the mechanic isn't bypassed.

[Lapak]

I'd argue that the passage with Answerer quotes IS ambiguous on the same grounds that only1doug uses. It does not clearly state that this choice is made maneuver-by-maneuver; it says that the recovery method is dependent on the class that the maneuver is being applied to. You can certainly read it as saying that this choice is made per-maneuver, but there is a perfectly sound interpretation that it's not.

[Aegis013]

I'm sticking with my guns on separation of Maneuvers Known and Maneuvers Readied. But as I said before, your interpretation about Maneuvers Known only going to one martial progression seems equally valid.

Though, in my aforementioned build, I realized that your interpretation in its entirety (including can't know a single maneuver under two separate martial progressions) doesn't really hurt my build. It makes the every round swift teleport come in a bit later, but it makes the Idiot Crusader part of the build come online much earlier.