Changes to swordsage, enought to bump up a tier?

[swankjon]

Hi there,

My combat campaign is about to start and I have two players playing swordsage, one is a more seasoned player who wanted a monk like character (monk's aren't available because of my tier usage) and a new player who wanted a stealthy badass.

My solution was to remove quick to act from both of them and add things with more flavor. I was wondering if either of these things will take them head and shoulders above other tier 3's (or even tier 2's) in my campaign.

Changes to Unarmed Swordsage:

Added Imp. Unarmed Strike
Monk Unarmed progression
ki strike progression at 5/10/15 minus the sunder ability for adamantite version
slower flurry of blows progression.

Changes to Stealthy swordsage:

Added Kukri as shadowhand weapon
Sneak attack progression where quick to act would normally be.

Is their anything obvious i should be worried about?

[eggynack]

It doesn't look like it would, no. It seems like you're mostly just giving the swordsage slightly different numbers, and it doesn't even seem like those numbers are necessarily better. In any case, these changes don't grant anything approaching casting, so you should be fine. Tier 3, all the way.

[danzibr]

There's no way that's enough to bump SS up a tier. SS are regarded as tier 3. Beyond giving them casting I'm not sure there's a such a simple way to up their tier. Remember that going from tier 3 to tier 2 you need a lot more versatility, and the only thing you're doing is making them better in combat.

[Amnestic]

Not even close to moving up a tier.

[Studoku]

He can't teleport long distances, summon things, shapechange or cast 9th level spells- the things with enough raw power to put a class in tier 2. No matter how much bigger you make the numbers, swordsage is still tier 3.

[Eldan]

Not remotely enough for Tier 2. Remember, Tier 2 can be summed up as "at least one way to break the campaign setting over your knee and make the DM cry, and probably several ways to be better than other characters at their specialization".

Simple test. Can you ruin the economy of a small country on your own given two weeks and no starting funds? No? Probably not tier 2.

[Twilightwyrm]

Does it need to be a spell list though? Say I wanted to make a powerful nature themed Swordsage, and I therefore gave the Swordsage access to Wild Shape, as a druid? If that didn't bump them up a tier, would that at least get them close? What about Wild Shape as the Master of Many Forms?

[Twilightwyrm]

Not remotely enough for Tier 2. Remember, Tier 2 can be summed up as "at least one way to break the campaign setting over your knee and make the DM cry, and probably several ways to be better than other characters at their specialization".

Simple test. Can you ruin the economy of a small country on your own given two weeks and no starting funds? No? Probably not tier 2.

Do you think incinerating most of their capital city in 60ft. radii would wreck their economy?

[Eldan]

Not properly game-breaking yet, really. Wild Shape is powerful, but not "Wish, Gate and Shapechange" powerful.

[Twilightwyrm]

Not properly game-breaking yet, really. Wild Shape is powerful, but not "Wish, Gate and Shapechange" powerful.

So then would a Warmage 18/Spellcasting PrC 2 jump all the way up from T4 to T2? After all, just two levels in any other Spellcasting Advancing PrC means their 16th level Ecclectic Learning can net them one of these spells. So...?

[eggynack]

So then would a Warmage 18/Spellcasting PrC 2 jump all the way up from T4 to T2? After all, just two levels in any other Spellcasting Advancing PrC means their 16th level Ecclectic Learning can net them one of these spells. So...?
I think the answer to this is, "Kinda". At level 20, if they can cast those spells, then they're at tier two levels of power. However, that doesn't mean the build is a tier two overall. Most of the build, they're still running at regular tier four levels. As an example of this, look at the truenamer and the healer. They both get access to gate at super high levels, but they're considered to be around tier four and tier five respectively, because the rest of the progression is at the lower tiers, and that's more important. Note that the truenamer is actually tierless, because of their ridiculous variation in power level based on optimization, but they tend to be at tier four at high op levels.

[Eslin]

Shapechange, maybe low tier 2 because it's so incredibly versatile.

For the rest, no, tier 2 classes are all both versatile and powerful, just less versatile than tier 1s. One really good spell does not a tier 2 make unless it contains huge amounts of versatility.

[Twilightwyrm]

I think the answer to this is, "Kinda". At level 20, if they can cast those spells, then they're at tier two levels of power. However, that doesn't mean the build is a tier two overall. Most of the build, they're still running at regular tier four levels. As an example of this, look at the truenamer and the healer. They both get access to gate at super high levels, but they're considered to be around tier four and tier five respectively, because the rest of the progression is at the lower tiers, and that's more important. Note that the truenamer is actually tierless, because of their ridiculous variation in power level based on optimization, but they tend to be at tier four at high op levels.

True, but considering that the Healer doesn't have access to Eclectic Learning, and the Truenamer...so like I said the Healer doesn't have access to Eclectic Learning. Even if it is just a few of the best spells D&D has to offer, surely, one would think, that would be enough to at least push them into T3 territory for the majority of their existance. Hell one might even justify T2, on the premise that while they aren't going to even have as many of the greatest spells as a Sorcerer or Favored Soul, they still have access to them.

[Emperor Tippy]

If you want Swordsage to be tier 2 then you just make it a spellsage (see the adaptation section of the Swordsage entry in ToB).

Otherwise most nothing you would do would raise them from tier 3 to tier 2.

----
In the tiers the line between tier 1 and tier 2 tends to be very hazy and depends as often on build and spell selection as anything else.

The line between tier 2 and tier 3 is about the most solid on the list. Virtually nothing that is tier 3 has the strategic (as opposed to tactical) flexibility and power to break into the top two tiers.

---
None of your changes effect the classes power all that much. The 5d6 sneak attack is somewhat nice and makes it a better one level dip class but that's about it.

[Renen]

Swordsage is T3. I dont think you can do anything to him w/o rewriting whole class that will put him into T2, which is where Sorcerer is.

[ArcturusV]

Adding onto what Tippy said, the Tier ranking isn't "Sheer Power" so much, except when talking about tier 4/5/6, where they are ranked by increasing amounts in incompetence. Tier 2 is basically "Can do anything... but cannot change my abilities on the fly". Thus you have things like limited Spells Known like Sorcerer, Favored Soul, etc. Tier 1 being "Can do anything, and can change my abilities if needed to adapt", such as Wizards, Clerics, Druids, etc.

So in order to bump up the Swordsage to Tier 2, you have to put in a lot of "I Win" buttons. And then basically make it so they can't choose all the "I Win" buttons at once. I don't mean I Win like throwing a lot of damage dice on an attack. I mean things like True Sight (I Win vs Illusions), Mind Blank (I Win versus Enchantments), Gate (I Win versus a lot of things), Shapechange (I Win versus you trying to be built to counter what I am), Foresight (I Win versus all ambushes and traps), etc.