Unarmed SwordSage -what it acquire and what is loosing

[Biskup]

Hi

Recently I started playing as Unarmed SwordSage that mimics a "Grappling Boxer". As describtion of "unarmed" Swordsage variant is very inacurate, me and my GM have some... discussion about what Unarmed SwordSage should have.

My variant:

Looses:
light Armor proficency.

Gains:
Monk unarmed BAB
Monk unarmed dmg
+ of course attacks without provoking attack on opp.

My GM variant:

Looses:
light Armor proficency.
Wisdom AC bonus while wearing light armor

Gains:
Monk unarmed BAB
Monk unarmed dmg
+ of course attacks without provoking attack on opp.


At first it might not look so bad. BUT, take in account that if I would take light armour proff. perk, I could get some flashy light armour and have Wis AC bonus (as per standard SwordSage). Monk usually have rather low AC, but he gets that +1 AC /5 lvl bonus, which is not great, but it's always something.

What are Your variants of Unarmed SwordSage? Any ideas? Also, I'm looking for additional maneuvers, not listed in Book Of Nine Swords.

[Snowbluff]

I leave them the same. They can get armor proficiency from another class, or wear Twist Cloth. If I were to make a change, I would make it so they could qualify for Stunning Fist as a feat, and they get the armor bonus when wearing no armor.

Just a heads up, as it stand the variant gives the Monk Unarmed Ability, which includes the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.

[Red Fel]

Assuming you're using the variant as described in the text, (which is vaguely written and subject to much interpretation), the clear language is that you "give the swordsage the monk's unarmed strike progression and remove his light armor proficiency." That's all it says.

So let's break that down into the two clauses. The second clause, "remove his light armor proficiency[,]" is easy: remove light armor from Swordsage's proficiencies. Done.

The first clause, "give the swordsage the monk's unarmed strike progression[,]" is the tricky one. Here's how I would do it.

1: Give the Swordsage a Monk's unarmed strike progression, as expressed in the Monk class description. As shown on the table in the Monk entry, treat the Swordsage's unarmed attack as that of a Monk of his Swordsage level. (For example, a Swordsage 5 would deal 1d8 damage on an unarmed attack, like a Monk 5.)

2: Read the explanation of the Monk's unarmed strike. According to the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/monk.htm):

At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

A monk also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown on Table: The Monk. The unarmed damage on Table: The Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage.

Basically, convert every mention of Monk into Swordsage. This includes the unarmed strike progression mentioned above. So, the Swordsage can deal lethal or nonlethal damage at will, can treat unarmed strikes as natural or manufactured, may apply full Strength bonus, and gets the advanced progression.

3: Give the Swordsage Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. Monks get this at level 1, because they have to; the class is built primarily (but not exclusively) around unarmed strikes. Swordsage should get this as well.

That's how I would run an unarmed Swordsage.

As per what you and your DM did, I approve of his suggestion of removing the Wisdom-to-AC for light armor, seeing as the unarmed Swordsage loses light armor. I don't think it's a mandatory choice for the adaptation, but I don't find it objectionable. I don't see the point in "gaining Monk unarmed BAB," however, since Swordsage BAB tracks Monk BAB.

[Snowbluff]

Doing #2 is the only possible reasonable interpretation. It gives improved unarmed by RAW.

[Biskup]

Well, I already agreed with DM that unarmed SwordSage is treated as equal level monk, for feats and item req.

Main case is, that such character will have very low AC. Thats why Im wondering if Swordsage with unarmed variant should loose Wisdome bonus while wearing armour. Nine Swords states that character looses only light armour proff, not Wisdom AC bonus while wearing light armour

[Red Fel]

Well, I already agreed with DM that unarmed SwordSage is treated as equal level monk, for feats and item req.

Main case is, that such character will have very low AC. Thats why Im wondering if Swordsage with unarmed variant should loose Wisdome bonus while wearing armour. Nine Swords states that character looses only light armour proff, not Wisdom AC bonus while wearing light armour

Valid. And by RAW, you would be correct. But consider several things.

1: The Unarmed Swordsage Adaptation is not a variant. It is not well-written, not well-fleshed out, not explained to any degree of detail. As such, it is open to interpretation.

2: Think of RAI. Basically, Unarmed Swordsage was brought in to say "What if we took a monk, took away all of the class features apart from his unarmed progression, and gave him maneuvers?" The answer, obviously, was awesome. However, a Monk would not have the Wis-to-AC while wearing light armor; why, logically, should an Unarmed Swordsage - designed, more or less, to function as monk-plus-maneuvers - have this ability? If you want a Swordsage that simply fights unarmed, don't bother with the unarmed adaptation; simply take Improved Unarmed Strike and Superior Unarmed Strike, keep your proficiencies, and call it a day.

3: Your DM is the DM. Rule Zero is in full effect.

[Biskup]

You might be right... but I think of Unarmed SwordSage more like "SwordSage with Monk's Fists". Remove Armor proff, add everything that monk have for fist fightning, and thats all. More like 75% of SwordSage and 25% of monk. Going this way, why SS should loose Wisdom AC bonus? AC is very tight either way.

[Snowbluff]

I don't see what you would want out of it. You get to deal decent damage with unarmed attacks.

[Red Fel]

You might be right... but I think of Unarmed SwordSage more like "SwordSage with Monk's Fists". Remove Armor proff, add everything that monk have for fist fightning, and thats all. More like 75% of SwordSage and 25% of monk. Going this way, why SS should loose Wisdom AC bonus? AC is very tight either way.

Swordsage with Monk's fists is simply taking IUS and SUS. AC becomes less of an issue at later levels anyway, and with clever use of your maneuvers, most things will be hard-pressed to hit you in the first place.

It sounds like what you really wanted was a Monk, with maneuvers, who could keep his Wis-to-AC bonus while wearing light armor. And at that point, you're just cherry-picking features. Don't sweat the loss of light armor - what you gain from being a Swordsage more than makes up for it.

[Biskup]

in EvE Online it's called "Glass Cannon" :P Good damage, but no defense. Unfortenatly, in DnD one need both... And on this character it's almost impossible to get resonable AC with Agility score of 10 :P. That's why Im trying to find any tiny bit of additional AC.

We are playing low magic setting, so magic braces +1 are best what would I get :P

[Red Fel]

in EvE Online it's called "Glass Cannon" :P Good damage, but no defense. Unfortenatly, in DnD one need both... And on this character it's almost impossible to get resonable AC with Agility score of 10 :P. That's why Im trying to find any tiny bit of additional AC.

We are playing low magic setting, so magic braces +1 are best what would I get :P

I'm familiar with the glass cannon archetype. Before it described spacecraft, it described wizards. :smallwink:

In D&D, however, you don't need both. You need means of avoiding being hit, not soaking the damage. Neither Swordsage nor Monk is a class designed around taking hits; they're designed around not being hit in the first place. If your idea of playing a melee character, particularly a ToB character, is simply to wade into the brawl and trade blows, you're not playing the class to its full potential.

At higher levels, AC becomes less relevant; the big threats will overcome your AC. You will want concealment, miss chance, and things like SR or touch AC. The fact that you're allowed to wear linen robes becomes a moot point.

I understand your concern about AC. But if you wish to follow the path of the enlightened fist, grasshopper, you must let go of your attachment to earthly fears, including those of AC. Release your mortal concerns, for only then will you begin to understand how to break face.

[Talya]

really, a balanced approach would be to give the unarmed swordsage the monk unarmored AC bonus in place of its own armored wis to ac bonus. But that's not what the variant suggests.

[Snowbluff]

Well, you can still wear armor. Nothing really changes, if you read what armor non-proficiency does.

[Talya]

Well, you can still wear armor. Nothing really changes, if you read what armor non-proficiency does.

yes. The point is, the unarmed swordsage variant was clearly trying to influence you to not wear armor.

So instead of just removing the proficiency, why not switch Wis-to-AC bonuses with the monk? That'd make it far more likely that the unarmed swordsage goes nekkid.

[Urpriest]

Gains:
Monk unarmed BAB


Monk Unarmed BAB hasn't been a thing since 3.0.

[Snowbluff]

yes. The point is, the unarmed swordsage variant was clearly trying to influence you to not wear armor.

So instead of just removing the proficiency, why not switch Wis-to-AC bonuses with the monk? That'd make it far more likely that the unarmed swordsage goes nekkid.

There's no point. Armor is both cooler and more effective than-

Sorry, I just threw up. Monks do that do me. Either way, more changes solve nothing and Leather armor is more effective until level 15, so the change would only be a nerf.

Also, you said "clearly," and I will disagree. Read my previous post. It looks to me like they intended for players to just wear slightly lighter armor than normal.

[Biskup]

I think that I ll go as it is right now... I will try to get items like earthsilk clothes just to boost a little survivability and maybe I ll think of something later on. Character goes for grappling most of the time, or engage enemy with very mobile boxing technicues, so I think that I will manage, trading AC for mobility

Do any of You recall some kind of additional maneuvers list, not included in Nine Swords? I found old topic (from 2008) on some random RPG forum with list of around 100 new moves, but .doc file was not avaliable anymore...

Btw, any interesting hints as for character described above? Expensive magic items like Monks Belt are out of my reach most likelly, but perks, or perk combinations are not ;)

[Snowbluff]

BE a human and be Jotunbrud.

Don't grapple.:smalltongue:

Improved Trip + Setting Sun.

If allowed, Might Arms (1kgp, Faith of Ebberon) and Battlefist (2.6kgp, Ebberon Campaign Setting) for the size bonus to damage.

Wear armor with no Armor Check Penalty.

Shadow Sun Ninja is fun. Warblade Dip!

[Biskup]

My character already is Human with Jotunbrud :P

Grappling is "super effective!" vs wizards, as One can silnece them without problems. Whats more, many maneuvers starts with grapple, or at least You can execute it while in grapple. Monk like characters can deal normal dmg while in dogfight, and, as a bonus, it's small scale crowd controll ability

[Snowbluff]

Excuse me, but everything you just said reminded me why I never grapple. It's mostly because all of that is largely untrue.

EDIT: Yep, I looked through the ToB. Grappling will never be an initiator's focus. At best he can take 2 stances for it.

[Talya]

EDIT: Yep, I looked through the ToB. Grappling will never be an initiator's focus. At best he can take 2 stances for it.

I have a swordsage "assassin" (the role, not the class) built that I want to play someday. While Grappling is not her "focus" per se, I made sure she was very good at it. I based her on Xenia Onatopp. Crushing Weight of the Mountain is a fun stance.

[Snowbluff]

So a case study that provides no argument against the statement. :smallconfused:

Either way, grappling sucks. It's a good way to CC yourself, and a good way to slow down a game. From level 1 wizards can have a way out of it. I would not bother investing in it.

[Talya]

So a case study that provides no argument against the statement. :smallconfused:

Huh? I wasn't trying to provide an argument against your statement. Nor do I see how an unused character I want to play some day is a case study.

[Red Fel]

So a case study that provides no argument against the statement. :smallconfused:

Either way, grappling sucks. It's a good way to CC yourself, and a good way to slow down a game. From level 1 wizards can have a way out of it. I would not bother investing in it.

Going with this one. Grappling is a feature, not a focus. There was a thread recently where a player was trying to build a perfect grappler, and frustrated that he wasn't shining. In particular, he was frustrated with the fact that Freedom of Movement rendered his entire build worthless.

The fact is, you can make a good build that features grappling. Grappling rules are still difficult and one-sided, and easily avoided by simply staying outside of melee range, but when the situation arises, you're in a good place if grappling is a single tool in your toolbox. Talya's suggestion is a good one; a character who is very good at grappling, but not focused on it, can be a force to be reckoned with.

But saying upfront "I'm focusing on grappling!" is like saying "I want my Barbarian to use a crossbow all the time!" Enjoy your specialization, hope that your campaign is short, and don't gripe when you cease to be functional. It's sad but true.

Moving past that point, you repeatedly mentioned looking for alternate maneuvers. Canonically, ToB was the only source for maneuvers. However, if you're willing to take homebrews, google-fu will serve you well, grasshopper. Alternatively, you could wait to see what PF's new book brings; I don't play PF, but it certainly sounds exciting.

[Snowbluff]

If you're stuck on grappling after this, don't take Clever Wrestler unless you can't get size bonuses, and look at Magic of Incarnum's Girallon Arms.

The Pathfinder ToB is being done by Dreamscarred Press, who I hear are a thousand times more competent than Paizo. I dislike PF, but I might be tempted to backport some of the maneuvers. Then again, this site have a bunch of peach homebrew schools already...

Huh? I wasn't trying to provide an argument against your statement. Nor do I see how an unused character I want to play some day is a case study.
If you weren't, I do not know why would you disagree. Whatever. ~(' .')~

[Talya]

If you weren't, I do not know why would you disagree. Whatever. ~(' .')~

I didn't disagree. Nor did I agree. Grappling has always just been something I make sure my characters have a defense against so I don't get immobilized by a grappler. It's not something I've ever tried or initiated in a game.

I just posted that I wanted to try out at least one of the TOB grapple stances on a character I made.

Edit: I have been grappled on a sorcerer, by a mook I let get too close. I got myself a ring of freedom of movement shortly thereafter.

[Snowbluff]

Sorcerers generally aren't as safe as wizards. Dimension Hop or Benign Transposition are good ideas. My Familiars generally pack Benign Transposition Wands. :smallsmile:

[Phelix-Mu]

Grappling can be a fine strategy in a low-op game where the DM isn't making sure that the BBEG's and their henchmen have the standard immunity items or buffs. Games like that do get played, quite often in fact. To me, it still feels like a one trick pony, though. The maneuvers help a bit, and some serious optimization in grappling will allow you to grapple most anything, but once one does that, the DM is fairly certain to reach out for the countermeasures, which, as mentioned, are many and rather easy to come by (and at least several of them are infallible).

If there was one combat maneuver that needed a makeover (aside from Overrun), it would be Grapple, in my mind. The rules are complex, not terribly intuitive, and they slow down the already numbers-intensive realm of melee combat. I'd probably remove grapple and replace it with a Pin technique (hold someone helpless to open them up to other attacks or whatever), or Constrict (just a hold that deals damage), and I'd make constrict more dangerous (as it should be when a barbarian rocking Strength in the high 20s grabs you...important things break right away). Hmm, something to think about.

And, in any case, freedom of movement is horribly overpowered for its level. IMHO.

[Chronos]

Well, swordsages aren't proficient with bows, and even if they were there are very few maneuvers that work with them, so as a swordsage, you're probably not loosing anything.

What you lose is, of course, another question entirely.

[Biskup]

What? What bows? Who mentioned bows earlier ? :P

[Chronos]

You did-- You kept on talking about loosing things. Loosing is what you do when you release an arrow from a bow, and has nothing to do with losing things.

[Vortenger]

For the record, losing light armor proficiency doesn't hurt the swordsage much, if at all.

At level 1 wear leather. With a 0 ACP you take no penalties whatsoever and still get Wis to AC. Later, move to a mithril chain shirt, which also has 0 ACP, and therefore no penalties. If you can add a silkweave dastana and chaihar-ana (both from OA) to your chain shirt, you can be rocking a +6 AC bonus with 0 penalties, no magic enhancements, and no need for proficiency.

Then enchant and add your scaling wisdom to have an AC generally higher than the party cleric.

p.s. All classes save the wizard, monk, and sorcerer gain light armor proficiency as a bonus feat (per the feat entry). This is technically independent of your class proficiencies. One interpretation of the RAW of that is that you can trade away your class feature and still retain the feat, as it is a 'bonus'. If your DM is lenient, you can have your cake and eat it, too.

[Snowbluff]

Way swordsaged, bro. :smalltongue:

[Vortenger]

Well, you can still wear armor. Nothing really changes, if you read what armor non-proficiency does.

I assume this is what you mean. You're right, of course, but most people can't glean the meaning of your statement unless they already understand said rule. Just spelling it out for those with less op-fu than yourself.

[Snowbluff]

I was just messing around, hence the :smalltongue:. The explanation is well appreciated. :smallsmile: